this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
32 points (94.4% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

6940 readers
196 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 19 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] huginn@feddit.it 7 points 1 year ago

Aight Miku fan here is just fucking trolling.

Overall this is great news for BK: we need more housing and we need it yesterday.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its still from glas and concrete and horribly inefficient

[–] huginn@feddit.it 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The equivalent suburb would be 10x the emissions because people drive.

NYC needs millions more units of housing: this is how that happens in the densest parts of the city.

Need to density other parts: sure. But it's good to have buildings anywhere we can get them in NYC.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You made a big mistake there, you assume working people live in these things...

[–] huginn@feddit.it 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you don't build shitty apartments for the rich they'll just gentrify poor areas.

More housing is more housing.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is just BS as most apartments in skyscrapers are empty in general because not even rich people want to own that shit.

How about that(above image) and good public transport?

[–] huginn@feddit.it 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is downtown Brooklyn - NYC. Building the apartments in your image would lower density where this skyscraper is being built.

Luxury buildings in downtown Brooklyn are not for the super rich - they're for the 1%ers who work at banks downtown, and will almost certainly be rental units which are pretty constantly booked.

You don't get how housing constrained NYC is.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lower density isn't the problem with affordable housing and public transport.

The skyscrapers are not good, they never are.

Get public transport.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We're talking about Brooklyn NY

Do you know a single thing about Brooklyn NY?

Cause you don't sound like you know a single thing about Brooklyn NY. Or about what it means to be housing constrained.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you know what public transport is?

[–] huginn@feddit.it 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok so you don't know what you're talking about.

I live in Brooklyn. While the transit could use some expansions it's not only the best transit system in the USA it also has the most subway stations of any transit system on earth.

If that hasn't fixed housing affordability what's your proposed solution?

What's that? Oh density? Ok cool glad we agree. Let's build skyscrapers.

[–] Mikufan@ani.social -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The best public transport in usa is still shit compared to Europe... And density increase isn't the way to go.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 3 points 1 year ago

Mai sei mai andato a Roma? Vissi sia a Roma che a Napoli e nessun parte del trasporto pubblico è di qualità simile a quello di NYC. Nessun. Parte.

Scemo.

Fuck off troll.

[–] betz24@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Does anyone live in an electric building? I'd be curious if they can deliver enough hot water to all the units in time

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Most electric heat pump hot water heaters have a slow-mode which uses the heat pump, and fills a large tank with hot water, and a fast-mode which uses a resistive heater when the tank runs out. I don't see why this situation is particularly different for larger buildings, except that they need a larger tank and an electrical supply which can deliver the needed wattage.

Cheapo landlord could of course install an undersized unit, as they can with any other key system.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Big buildings like this usually use a central boiler. I'd be shocked if they weren't.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It still amounts to "I'm heating up a big tank of water and supplying it to people on an as-needed basis." The article makes it clear that they're using several to supply the whole building:

Electric water boilers | These provide hot water for the building and are typically more energy efficient than gas boilers, which are common in New York City.

[–] huginn@feddit.it 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Fair enough. I guess there could be a time when they need resistive to augment that but I'd think with sufficient boiler capacity you could do only heat pump.

[–] silence7@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 year ago

You definitely can do only heat pump, but adding resistive backup is cheap if you're already putting in new wiring anyways. So people do.