= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CronoDAS comments on Wikipedia articles from the future - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (86)
I am seriously tempted to write something about a global warming catastrophe - I am extremely pessimistic about the world's ability to solve this particular tragedy of the commons problem.
What's a "catastrophe" in this context and which model predicts it?
Droughts, famines, flooding, etc.
I seriously expect 4 degrees Celsius warming by 2200, if not 2100.
Do you believe that by 2200 the level of human technology will be inadequate to deal with the droughts and flooding?
What would 'adequate' technology to 'deal with' those look like?
Droughts are pretty easy, you can do it right now if you stop trying to maximize evaporation and start doing something reasonable like drip irrigation.
Flooding is a bit different in that I assume we're speaking about the Greenland glaciers and some of Antractica melting. You can either prevent them from melting or just build high walls around particularly valuable pieces of real estate. Shorelines are never stable, anyway -- continental plates rise and sink, estuaries silt up, hurricanes rearrange barrier islands, etc.
The problem with flooding is not the average year. It's the year where you get a tornado that you haven't accurately predicted beforehand and that wrecks your defenses. Your dams break and then you lose a lot.
I'm very pessimistic about our ability to reduce greenhouse gas output, but considerably more optimistic about the potential for a technological solution that deals with the problem before things seriously blow up.