= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
qmotus comments on Open Thread, Aug. 1 - Aug 7. 2016 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (81)
What's the worst case scenario involving climate change given that for some reason no large scale wars occur due to its contributing instability?
Climate change is very mainstream, with plenty of people and dollars working on the issue. LW and LW-adjacent groups discuss many causes that are thought to be higher impact and have more room for attention.
But I realised recently that my understanding of climate change related risks could probably be better, and I'm not easily able to compare the scale of climate change related risks to other causes. In particular I'm interested in estimations of metrics such as lives lost, economic cost, and similar.
If anyone can give me a rundown or point me in the right direction that would be appreciated.
I think many EAs consider climate change to be very important, but often just think that it receives a lot of attention already and solving it is difficult, and that there are therefore better things to focus on. Like 80 000 hours for example.