Rob
Peter GleickYou are here.
[Welcome to 2024 and the past 800,000 years of atmospheric CO2.]
D's lack of faith in humanity
AT-AT Assault 🏳️⚧️And looking at the data, had we not started burning fuel at near astronomical levels, the planet was due for a recession in atmospheric CO2 ppm levels. But nope, we had to say "fuck that" and literally double it.
zilla@petergleick Can we just be done with the home sapiens sapiens.
504BatteryDrNature is done with us, that's for sure.
SyulangNever let it be said that that Nature encountered a problem that she couldn't solve. Just don't ask how.
Yes.
We're finding out now, and it's just getting started. 😬
𝟜𝟚𝟘 𝑠𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝟿𝟻@petergleick And then you have the crazy people like Orange Folks who say everything is normal… we had fluctuations in the past.
Michal Pawinski@petergleick Ironically, it reflects the population growth of humans in the past 100 years—8 billion people and increasing.
Roger Lancefield@Mencjusz @petergleick
Yeah, but let's be careful not to offload blame on to those who bear (and will bear) relatively little responsibility. The richest 10% of people on the planet are estimated to be responsible for around half of all emissions. It's the lifestyles of the wealthy minority that are driving climate change.
Yeah, but let's be careful not to offload blame on to those who bear (and will bear) relatively little responsibility. The richest 10% of people on the planet are estimated to be responsible for around half of all emissions. It's the lifestyles of the wealthy minority that are driving climate change.
André Lensink@roger @Mencjusz @petergleick
How rich are you? You might be surprised. You can easily check your position in the richest x% with this site:
https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i
How rich are you? You might be surprised. You can easily check your position in the richest x% with this site:
https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/how-rich-am-i
@andrelensink @Mencjusz @petergleick
I'm undoubtedly materially privileged, Andre, I'm not denying that. It's my duty (if I wish to be a 'good ancestor') to mitigate that fact. IMO, my privileged position makes any attempt to shift the blame for the impacts of the society I live in all the more unacceptable.
I'm undoubtedly materially privileged, Andre, I'm not denying that. It's my duty (if I wish to be a 'good ancestor') to mitigate that fact. IMO, my privileged position makes any attempt to shift the blame for the impacts of the society I live in all the more unacceptable.
@roger @Mencjusz @petergleick
I fully agree, Roger. We should not shift the blame. The website I mentioned opened my eyes: on a global I am much more privileged than I would have guessed before.
I fully agree, Roger. We should not shift the blame. The website I mentioned opened my eyes: on a global I am much more privileged than I would have guessed before.
It is not about blaming. It's about factors that impact the environment.
Rich that live in opulent lives in their private jets and yachts are part of the problem.
Part of the problem are the people who continue to reproduce irrespectively of the environmental degradation. More people, more resources needed.
8 billion is already unsustainable.
The OP's point concerned climate. The biggest contributing factors to climate breakdown, by far, are the economies and associated emissions of the wealthy and industrialised nations.
Anyone serious about solving this problem needs to address this glaring fact first. Encouraging people in the poorer parts of the world (where birth rates tend to be highest) to have fewer children, will do little to rein in emissions in any timescale that matters.
Emissions are not the only factor in environmental degradation. More land for housing or farming due to increased number of people also contributes to climate change. Overpopulation can dramatically affect local micro-climate. Look at India and toxic levels of CO2 due to overpopulation and consumption of goods.
Again, I agree that the wealthy are major contributors, but we are talking about a complex adaptive system where every part has an impact on the system itself.
@Mencjusz @petergleick
Yep, understood, but the OP's post was about the key greenhouse gas heating our planet, not broader environmental concerns.
CO2 along with the other GHGs has been and will continue to be disproportionately emitted by the lifestyles & economies of the wealthier nations. If the current pattern of pop. growth stopped tomorrow, it would barely move the emissions needle in any meaningful timescale. Hence global population is a red herring in terms of climate solutions.
Yep, understood, but the OP's post was about the key greenhouse gas heating our planet, not broader environmental concerns.
CO2 along with the other GHGs has been and will continue to be disproportionately emitted by the lifestyles & economies of the wealthier nations. If the current pattern of pop. growth stopped tomorrow, it would barely move the emissions needle in any meaningful timescale. Hence global population is a red herring in terms of climate solutions.
Paladin 
@petergleick Something, something sun! It is called seasons he he.
BardMoss the Bodhi Linux Guy@petergleick
That all looks very impressive, but what measuring equipment did we have until the last 30 years or so? How do they get the measurements for 200,000 years ago?
That all looks very impressive, but what measuring equipment did we have until the last 30 years or so? How do they get the measurements for 200,000 years ago?
@zaivala Google "Vostok ice cores" and learn about "paleoclimate" measures and indicators.
In this case they actually recover bubbles of ancient atmosphere trapped in ancient ice.
In this case they actually recover bubbles of ancient atmosphere trapped in ancient ice.
@petergleick I figured I was just too stupid to know something. Science go science
Nicky🦨✌️@petergleick thanks now i can show the “it’s cyclical” people how we ruined the cycle.
@petergleick hard to believe we have had that much of an impact in such a short geological time.
Lotneuv@allynkhine @petergleick
"Each part per million of CO2 in the atmosphere represents approximately 2.13 gigatonnes of carbon, or 7.82 gigatonnes of CO2"
"Around 2020 the emission rate was over 40 gigatons per year."
Referenced here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth's_atmosphere
Bosco 🇨🇦🤺@petergleick so what you’re saying is we should’ve started burning fossil fuels earlier at the previous CO2 dip?! *sarcasm* 🥲