SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We may be headed for an ice apocalypse which could result in the flooding of coastal cities before the end of this century. Glaciers in Antarctica may break and release ice, exposing taller cliffs, resulting in faster melting.
[...] A wholesale collapse of Pine Island and Thwaites would set off a catastrophe. Giant icebergs would stream away from Antarctica like a parade of frozen soldiers. All over the world, high tides would creep higher, slowly burying every shoreline on the planet, flooding coastal cities and creating hundreds of millions of climate refugees.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Rapid Collapse of Antarctic Glaciers Could Flood Coastal Cities by the End of this Century
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 48 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
TAPPING? You POLITICIANS! Don't you realize that the END of the "Wash
Cycle" is a TREASURED MOMENT for most people?!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 28 2017, @10:19AM (3 children)
I hope you're not saying it's expensive and it might not be sufficient, so we might as well stop trying. Because that's how I read that.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday November 29 2017, @04:43PM (2 children)
There is no "might not be" here. The system is a failure, even when it works as intended. So yes, stop "trying".
If you really want to fight climate change, please find an effective way to do it! I would suggest first finding low-lying fruit and aggressively targeting those first. For example, stopping coal fires (modern techniques have been devolved that make these far more viable), encouraging global reforestation and creation of habitat and wildlife corridors, reducing the wasting of human time and wealth on pointless tasks (like complex tax reporting or negative gain recycling), encouraging novel economic tools (like the "gig economy" [soylentnews.org]), and decommissioning old coal power plants in favor of more efficient or less carbon intensive power.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday November 30 2017, @05:49PM (1 child)
>>> Where's the evidence that fighting global warming makes for a better world?
That list you just gave makes for a start towards a better world.
The tax one is pretty silly, though. I'm pretty sure that mandating tire inflation warning on cars (another low-hanging fruit) has already saved a few orders of magnitude less energy/time/pollution than anything you could do with tax (including flat tax), despite how many cars I still see driving around with near-flats.
> decommissioning old coal power plants in favor of more efficient or less carbon intensive power.
Isn't that one of the main things climate change people ask for, along with raising car/house energy efficiency instead of digging tar sands ? I'm confused about why you sound contradictory while advocating the same things.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday November 30 2017, @06:28PM
"Less" is the word I would use above too. Tax policy is a remarkably wasteful activity. At least, we're not Italy.
You'd think so, until you see them knee-cap [wikipedia.org] a more efficient coal burning plant, not to mention their steadfast opposition to nuclear power. And let's keep in mind the policies that they do push, like treaties that don't do much, huge subsidies that greatly increase the cost of electricity (Germany's Energiewende, for example) or motor fuel (US's corn ethanol subsidies) - often while increase greenhouse gases emissions in the process.