Makes sense. China holds a good hand now, as they have probably peaked emissions five years ahead of their promise, and are not yet obliged with financial contributions. Also they need to sell renewables, electric cars etc. - especially to southern countries while US and EU put big tariffs. And if you look at the numbers, US is no longer so important in the world.
As a kid, I learned to write i = i +1, before school maths taught me it can’t. The point is, computers do iteration well, especially to model dynamics of real non-linear systems, while classical maths is good at finding algebraic solutions to equilibria - typically more theoretical than real. Calculus is great for understanding repeatable dynamics - such as waves in physics, also integrating over some distributions. But even without knowing that well you could still approximate stuff numerically with simple loops, test it, and if an inner-loop turns out to be time-critical or accuracy-critical (most are not), ask a mathematical colleague to rethink it - believe in iteration rather than perfect solutions.
Actually, if you swapped ‘on’ for ‘by’ (and cut ‘US diminishment’ etc.) you’d have a point there - Russian emissions per capita are among the world’s highest and growing, while they decline in the rest of the north - most commentators don’t notice as Russia has no NGOs left to shout about it.
(Note emissions fell since 1992 but from an even higher peak - while soviet industry produced that huge stockpile of missiles, tanks etc. now being used up). Also there are potentially huge climate feedbacks in Siberian forests and tundra, and we should be cooperating globally to help manage that. Maybe ‘europe from lisbon to vladivostok’ was a missed opportunity. I crossed siberia by train, helping local scientists attend COP3 in Japan, even studied many russian songs. Maybe one day we’ll cooperate again. But now I and many others here think the only way to end these wars, is for russians to dump their crazy leadership which started them.
I’m not an expert on biodiversity, although I’d like to be. Of course extinction is forever, and habitat loss is exacerbated by climate feedbacks.
But we have to accept change, making less fuss about protecting ‘native species’ (to me this feels rather like nativism wrt human immigration), and recognise that life on earth has suffered and survived worse calamities in geological history, so it will re-adapt to new situations, if we let plants and animals (including ourselves) move with the climate. We can’t save all the old ecosystems (for example from considering thermodynamics of the symbiosis within coral reefs, I have little hope for their survival with combination of higher T and CO2 and SLR), but we might help create new opportunities for new ecosystems in new places. In this context, what matters is the rate of changes - as it takes time for trees to grow, soil to accumulate - rather than ‘equilibrium’ changes.
I don’t know whether the OP was specifically reacting to lack of progress at the Biodiv COP16 in Cali, as well as US election and climate news, but as an old hand at COPs too, I hadn’t expected much, at the end of these circuses the only certainty is that the show must always go on (or diplomatic teams would kill their own job). In my opinion both COP processes have got bogged down talking mainly about money, and the UN system as a whole has not been working for many years, so we need some radical rethinking about global cooperation. Nevertheless on a local and regional level plenty of positive things are still happening. Also human population growth is also peaking, or heading that way, on all continents except Africa, and in many countries there is reforestation recently.
In general, bear in mind that many big science consortiums publish reports around this time of year, with extra-worrying headlines, in a bid to influence the COP processes. This is just part of the new-normal seasonal cycle, like the grey skies where I live, but not a reason to lose hope - brighter days will follow.
Hey, I study curves of climate change for decades now, and can tell you there is hope.
The world probably just passed peak global emissions - mainly due to China, which counts for a lot more than USA, whose emissions were falling anyway - that trend may slow down but not stop - as renewables are cheaper now.
China is manufacturing most renewable stuff now, but the science that drove the transition was led by europe and US, the work wasn’t wasted.
Indeed, peak emissions is not peak concentration, and there’s a lot of inertia in the deep ocean and ice-caps, so temperatures will keep rising during my lifetime, but peak temperature, at least below 2ºC, is foreseeable now, we are succeeding to bend those curves.
That wasn’t the case when I lost hope, due to the gap between climate science and policy, back in late 1990s. But I’m still alive now, and glad of it, and would like to stay around longer to see how the future evolves, only wish I’d prepared better for later life, as it’s a long path, not easy but challenges can be inspiring, no simple answers but the complexity is beautiful. Keep going.
I agree. For global discussions, are many Indians going to learn Chinese, Swahili, Hausa, Arabic, and vice-versa ?
Meanwhile international-english is the new latin… Even within India, the south insists to keep english as an official language, to avoid being dominated by more populous hindi-speaking north.
Alternatively LLM-translation may facilitate multi-lingual discussion, but in this case the language of software development may still be influential during such transition.
By the way - this is an important topic for future of lemmy, which should expand more towards the south - where’s a good place to develop it (beyond such set of replies)?
Looking forward - eventually - to trying out the wasm option, which might eventually help speed up my interactive climate-scenario model which already runs with scala.js. Although speed is not currently the limiting factor, a wasm option might expand the potential scope - for example to increase regional resolution. However I presume to do this I’d have to refactor the code a lot, to keep all the gui and io in js while pushing the intensive calculations to wasm, and create data interfaces between these (at a rather low level if i understand correctly?), which could get tricky as it’s tightly coupled, code evolved over 24 years …
Puzzled why wasm is promoted for “backend”, which already has other compilation targets (jvm, native), seems to me this is a bigger opportunity to do complex calculations in the browser.
Hmm. I’m still using a 2014 iMac, as its 27" 5k screen still very good for coding (with added memory). Sometimes develops a bunch of thin vertical lines, which come and go maybe dependent on temperature, but hasn’t changed for for ten years and i can live with those. Just wish they’d continue providing security updates for it.
I’ve been calculating and struggling with climate change for - well, seems a long time now.
As a young man, I didn’t expect that world society would survive as long as it has, I thought climate was existential now - in the 1990s - so I tackled what I could then, rather than planning for my life decades later (which is consequently not easy).
But we’re still here, and actually the range of scenarios looks somewhat better now than projections back then.
Probably emissions in China have just peaked, and as these are such a big chunk of the global total over last 20 years, so that may have peaked too. Global science and civil society has, collectively, helped to influence that. We have bent the curves.
Of course there is inertia in the system, it takes time for carbon and heat to penetrate the deep ocean and the ice, so the surface temperature will continue to rise for decades, but not necessarily for centuries - that’s still our choice. Yes, some megacities will drown beneath the sea, and others become uninhabitable due to heatwaves and drought, but there will be plenty of other places to live, we’ll need some redistribution. Many other species will be (and have been) lost, but life on earth has survived worse catastrophes, life will go on.
Especially people who care about such future, who educate themselves about the challenges, yourself included, should be part of that. But it’s a long-term problem, without quick-fixes, so plan accordingly, saving some strength for later, we’ll still need it.
I like some concepts and design of Mbin, something to learn from, but I’d believe more in its growth potential if not written mainly in php.
Interesting observation and analysis, and illustrates the potential of more lemmy-mastodon interaction.
Indeed mdon like-federation seems weird but I presume it was setup this way for efficiency, to reduce the number of small communications? Although Lemmy has a backend in rust - more efficient than mdon’s ruby - still I wonder whether the lemmy system of federating all upvotes would scale well if the number of users grows to that of mastodon and beyond ? Could there be some intermediate compromise solution (e.g. federate batches of 100 likes)?
Indeed to use scala-native you’d need pure-scala libraries, but the core lib re-implements most java lib, and there are now small simple external libs available for common tasks like file management, database, etc. - for example check out the lihaoyi suite.
I mainly use scala-js (to make this) which was formerly a java app - as it compiles to both js and jvm (cross-project) can gradually convert stuff you already wrote. I’ve tried native for stuff like pre-processing data files.
I didn’t discover Lemmy through search, nor did I ever use reddit - I found it from mastodon where a few people promote lemmy posts. Then gradually realised I preferred the community-focus here, compared to the individual-focus of mdon (although combining both could be good). As mdon has many more users, improving this inter-op would help to bring people here.
Scala compiles either to native, js or jvm - obviously the IO / interface options vary between these envs, but the lang is the same. Recently Scala 3.5 incorporates a simple-to-use CLI which makes it easier to compile to native (or just run a small file as a script, or experiment with a repl), native binaries are small and fast, and there are some simple io libraries. Since you can also compile to jvm to interop with java, that might help with transition.
I now use Scala 3, and very happy with syntactic whitespace (combined with an intelligent compiler)
Some good digging - indeed it is hard to understand all the different ways to define and interpret climate sensitivity.
Indeed that’s strange, and the flat slope in 2060 seems inconsistent with declared net-zero policies of China and even India. Russia has no such policy, but still strange to assume continuation of current government concepts there until 2060. (you can see the regional breakdown in supplem Fig 1. )
Regarding the map - an annual average cost is not so meaningful - in higher latitudes solar is not enough in winter - especially where it’s mostly cloudy during the first half of winter. Wind helps the balance but not everywhere, always. Of course, the sophisticated models behind the article know all that, the issue is simplistic presentation. I note “we assume hydrogen is used for seasonal storage” - this may be rather optimistic - how many dark months can that cover?
Clearly there’s a big gap between greenwash rhetoric and practical reality, but that’s not unusual all over the world.
The big question here is not the design of the central buildings, but whether it makes sense, as long-term sustainable development, to relocate the capital, and it seems to me there are arguments both ways. Jakarta is low-lying, literally sinking into the rising sea, and the island of Java is overcrowded - so something had to change. The new capital will lead to some deforestation on Borneo, on the other hand by bringing elites nearby they may re-evaluate the value of the jungle, it could be harder to hide destruction. The new location has potential for sea transport, but may lead to an over-dependence on air-transport.
Maybe useful to compare with other countries that moved their capital for geographical balance, and to avoid rising sea-level and overcrowding, for example Lagos to Abuja, or the new egyptian constructions SE of Cairo.
That’s a pity, I had been expecting level or a slight decrease in fossil CO2 (due to economy in China which has 1/3 of emissions), so maybe I was wrong, or maybe it’s just too soon to say (they give error range -0.3% to +1.9%). There’s still 1/6th of 2024 to go, including part of the NH winter whose heating demand varies with weather, most of the raw data that goes into these calculations is likely not so fresh, and chinese economic projections tend to be ‘optimistic’. The rise in LUC CO2 is mainly hangover from tail of El Niño early this year, leading to fires in southern hemisphere. So it’s still possible, if we think monthly, that the global peak was early this year, i.e. in the past.
Of course, they release GCB before the end of the year to try to influence the COP, which makes more sense when the COP is in mid-December (as typical, but not necessary - iirc COP1 was April and COP2 July). But does projected bad news really help motivate the world? I’d emphasise mixed news - some trends up, others down, which shows what difference we can make.