deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I saw a headline this morning that hedge fund managers are bullish on diesel. And the logic here seems to check out from what I skimmed. Will be interesting to see how this develops. A consumption downturn might kick the can out further.

I do support the argument that further complexifying essentials before the great decomplexification is a bad idea. However, burning a ton of fossil fuels to build alternative power sources is not a solution unless it is basically free energy - renewable alone is not sufficient justification. We need volitional degrowth. We won’t get it, but that’s what we need.

Not to diminish any particular arguments, but this is how these conversations always play out in my view:

Stop burning fossil fuels.

But we are in overshoot.

Yes

But we won’t be able to keep up agriculture.

Yes

But we won’t be able to keep up industry

Yes

But we won’t be able to keep up consumerism

Yes

But people will die.

Yes :(

But the rich will loses their riches

Yes

but but but

It doesn’t matter what the cost is, that’s the solution. The rest is simply consequence - and it grows greater by each day we ignore it.

Just because an ask is nigh impossible, does not mean that it is foolish or that it comes from ignorance.

c/collapse… such a lovely sound to it, even here at the end of civilization.

(refering to having decentralized from r/spaces)

And advertising customers. Great company all around.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

When visiting Hollywood, I have learned that the ideal parking spot is in a tree, which is just about the only place where other cars can’t reach you.

All this probably happened because we stopped to geoengineer by outlawing ships blowing sulphur into the air which created additional cloud cover.

You have your causality running backwards… this was already here, and the sulfur was masking it. This happened because we put so many GHG in the air.

It works, and without wrecking havoc on the overall system.

Europe is the one that initiated the sulfur reductions. With the additional dimming data now available, they reviewed it to determine how much damage had been caused. The conclusion? The benefits of reducing sulfur actually outweigh the damage of unmasked warming. The plan for further reductions was upheld.

If we mask radiative forcing, we don’t want to be doing it with sulfur. That leads to acid rain, ocean acidification, and asthma and other diseases. CaCO3 is a candidate. The long-term consequences of any candidate is unknown. Except that we know that the less sulfur raining down on us and the fish in general, the better.