• irkli@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The world, especially US china EU, has such vertically entangled petro consumption, infrastructure, and maybe worst of all as far as making changes go, growth corporations feeding off it/us, well probably have rapid, vs slower and assimilable, collapse.

    Hell today’s “homeless problem” will be a trivial joke relative to millions of people fleeing situations literally in-tolerable for countless reasons, probably soon enough – if this took place over 25 years it would be painful enough. If we get rapid migrations it’ll be war.

    • AndrewZabar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know if you’ve realized it, but without help from some advanced alien species, we are already as good as gone. The entire world is controlled by the absolutely worst people, and there’s no indication that anything can be done to save us at this point. Climate disasters, AI, lies and deceit on a global scale, astronomical imbalance of wealth… folks, we’re already fucked.

      • Leer10@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m reading Ministry for the Future and it does help imagine a world where we do get more fucked but we do turn things around even if we can’t get things how they used to be.

      • theneverfox@pawb.social
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        My hope is ai (or alien intervention).

        If it wakes up, a super intelligence could save us. And I think it’s heavily inclined to do so

        And if it doesn’t wake up (LLMs very likely won’t) but keep getting smarter, it’ll blow up economic systems while empowering individuals to crazy degrees. A single person could coordinate everyone on Earth taking action to save the world, while dispationately distributing resources.

        Or, it could just blow up the markets, giving us the time to try a better system before higher technology is ripped from our fingers

    • jarfil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If it takes 100 or 200 years, we’ll still have war.

      There is an argument to be had that many of the wars we’ve seen over the past 25 years, have already been at least in part rooted in access to water. Billions more will get impacted like that over the next century, with tens of millions of migrants a year, every year fleeing from both war and unhabitable conditions, for the next 100+ years.

      We’ve barely seen the beginning of it.

  • Vlyn@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I already knew that we’re fucked. But scientist said more around 2050 or something. The way things are progressing right now the next 10 to 20 years are going to be dicey.

    • killernova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      1 year ago

      More like over 200 years ago. There was a french female scientist that discovered the greenhouse effect before John Tyndall but I forgot her name and I’m at work rn, can’t search for it.

    • alcamtar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      48
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah they were predicting an ice age. And technically we’re still in an ice age, so the planet has to get warmer to reach it’s natural balance point. But it could also get cooler, because we’re in an interglacial period. If we don’t want continental glaciation maybe we should be thankful that the planet’s warming and not cooling.

      • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s a myth perpetuated by oil companies to discredit climate science. There was a single paper about it that was widely rejected as a crackpot theory by the larger scientific community. The consensus then was the same as it is now.

      • Enkrod@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, we are in an ice age, seeing as there are frozen poles. But we are changing that, soon there will be no frozen pole caps and with that, the ice age will have ended. We are creating our own hot period.

        Btw. it can only be an interglacial period if the glaciers return after. It’s a descriptive term, not a prescriptive, and there is no reason why the current warm period should be seen as interglacial.

        Because climate doesn’t just change without a cause, it needs a driving force. Earlier hot periods were caused by volcanic CO2 and the change happened slowly, over millions of years. Earlier cold periods had a number of different reasons, from nuclear winters after asteroid impact, ultra-high plant growth with not enough O2 consumers or global darkening due to the ash of a supervolcano or even the changing tilt of earths axis.

        There is no natural reason for the current warm period to turn into continental glaciation, let alone end so early and so fast, let alone the entire ice age, that has created temperatures that humans are comfortable with, just melting away around us. We have likely ended the ice age entirely, as much heat as we trapped in the atmosphere.

        Climate changes more rapidly right now than it ever did before bar the impact of ecocidal asteroids and the consequences are dire. We are heating up the planet and there is no force cooling it. If we want to stay even a little bit comfortable, we should drastically reduce the amount of energy trapped in our atmosphere.

  • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s be honest, this will end up with only the ultra-rich surviving in the last few strips of livable surface of the planet - and them elated to have finally “culled the undeserving” as they have been hoping for for millennia.

    • billytheid@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, history is your best teacher here. They will try that, get murdered, and be replaced by a crude junta while the rest of us starve

      • iByteABit@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because they’re causing this shit for decades now, solely because of their greed. If most of them suddenly have a change of heart and decide to put their power to help the world then opinions about them will improve, until then it’s pretty justifiable to want to lynch those responsible one by one like the unhinged murderers they are.

      • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Wealth is power.

        With great power comes great responsibility.

        With great wealth comes great responsibility.

        Did the wealthiest take responsibility? No, they used their wealth and power to sell off the future of the entire planet for a tiny bit of personal instant gratification.

      • billytheid@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ve been campaigning about climate change since I learned about it, all told over thirty years, and those bastards have been gutting the planet the whole time. I’m wholly in favour of the any means necessary approach

    • Spaniard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Look at previous violent revolutions and see who died and who lived. I wouldn’t bet on the ultra-rich, there are simple more of the rest but a new elite will rule, just like the old one.

      • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is one massive difference between former violent revolutions and the current ones - the ultra-rich of last century still had to rely on appeasing the military to do their bidding, but the ultra-rich of today now have access to automated weapons of mass destruction at the reach of their fingertips. If they feel like it, they can nuke the planet as a last-resort measure, while they’re sipping their champagne in a self-sustainable complex in the middle of nowhere.

        • dimlo@lemmy.world
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          As if they can produce champagne and other stuff out of nowhere. They may have a nuclear fallout bunker somewhere hidden in a desert but they can only rely on existing food / materials they can accumulate now. Most likely cans of food. Their champagne bottle will run dry unless they’re hiding in a massive Amazon underground warehouse that no one can access it. After all we have seen the riots in Paris, riots in Hongkong, if the law enforcement is not strong enough, people will automatically go riot mode, and if there is really a large conflict, there will be no one protecting the wealthy ones property and everyone is going for themselves

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          access to automated weapons of mass destruction at the reach of their fingertips

          They don’t. WMDs are far from automated, they require multiple human steps to get deployed, and each one of those can say “no” at any time (then possibly get court martialed, but the WMD stays undeployed).

          What’s more threatening, is having those ultra-rich promise everyone in the chain of command (and their families) a place at their self-sustainable complex.

        • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 year ago

          they’re sipping their champagne in a self-sustainable complex in the middle of nowhere

          well yeah, if a self-sustainable complex was even remotely achievable.

    • cyberpunk007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Then the ultra rich will perish because they don’t know how to survive cause they don’t have the “plebs” to do any of the underling work.

      “What do I do when my motor makes this sound?!”

      • Carlos Solís@communities.azkware.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s why the concept of artificial intelligence is so appealing to them - having a compilation of all human knowledge, without actually having to deal with humans claiming “nonsense” like human rights and a livable wage.

        • cristalcommons@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          that’s funny, because if they rely on AI to serve them, they will the first ones to be screwed. the most replaceable human class in the History is not plebs, but tyrants. they are the least prepared, the least talented, the least creative, the least reliable, the least resourceful, and finally, the least willing to contribute something to any compilation. so let them have fun while they can.

      • FireMyth@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not If it’s unlivably hot outside. Those skill mean jack if nothing can stand the heat.

          • SolarMech@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ecosystems there won’t necessarily fare all too well. Trees are drying up because they aren’t used to that dryness/heat. New trees will take time to grow and they don’t necessarily support the same species.

            The mix of species you used to have that lived in a balanced way is being disturbed by various invasive species.

            I’m not saying those ecosystems will necessarily collapse, but there is a nonzero risk that they might.

                • AquaTofana@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’d imagine places like Svalbard. Technically it’s inhabitable now, and has been for decades but it’s the most Northern year round sustained population on the globe.

                  Further North is Arctic tundra and there isn’t a sustained population. Maybe he’s referring to areas like that.

                  Though I will say that back in 2019 I saw an article about how every winter a bunch of Reindeer in Svalbard die due to climate change. As the spring rolls in and snow melts, Reindeer corpses are left behind in the fields 🥺.

            • billytheid@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              The wildfires that will consume the Siberian wilderness when it thaws will likely change opinions on living there

          • FireMyth@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The entire world is heating. The artic/antarctic doesn’t have the landmass to sustain population. Everywhere else is already either habitable now but won’t be soon or already too hot to be habitable.

      • Clbull@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Any billionaire would be smart to build a massive self-sufficient compound (complete with temperature-regulated indoor farms, solar panels/wind turbines, huge stockpiles of supplies, firearms and a loyal crew of mercenaries or some armed drones to defend from intruders), because I really do think that we are gonna have to adopt the prepper mentality within the next few decades.

        We mocked people for prepping for nuclear war, zombie apocalypses and raptures, but soon we are going to see the climate well and truly turn against us.

      • jarfil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’ll likely have the best chance of survival if you know survival skills

        Funny you say it like that… I know some self-un-survival skills, so that should also work out fine.

      • hglman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Climate collapse will make it more important to be able to move food around the world. The effect will be to strengthen hierarchies capable of managing global-scale food enterprises. The result will be a hyper-wealthy class that transports food, sustains local farmers via trade, and suppresses them to keep power. Farming will be what everyone does, and it will be essential to keep them doing it as yields will plummet.

      • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sort of like how being rich didn’t matter when the Roman empire collapsed?

        Oh wait we were left with kings and peasants, and far worse wealth inequality than there was before, and there was almost a thousand years of that before humanity started making progress again. Those were called the Dark Ages.

        Anyone trying to say the rich won’t survive is completely ignorant of history.

        • hglman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, it might not be the same rich, but someone will be rich and, by definition, will have the means to live. Your right, but its kind of an always true statement. The wealthy ppl of Rome certainly did not fair well in the collapse of Rome and power moved to new places in that time.

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, the rich will be eaten. Since their power completely relies on society. Taliban in the Mountains of Afghanistan will be fine and will be fighting off a alien occupation in 1000 years.

      • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Funny you say that considering anyone earning more than 40k USD yearly is part of the 2.6 percentile of the richest population GLOBALLY.

        Seeing as 90% of us in south America earn even less than half of that, I’d suggest y’all prepare to be eaten by the starving poor masses of the global south

        • s_s@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you look at the Bronze Age collapse, its the nomadic mountain people that survive.

    • NecessaryWeevil@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      ”Don’t be daft. We’re in a warming phase.”

      Yeah, here’s what you tell them. Temperatures were at baseline when the industrial revolution began. That’s just a handful of generations. We’ve now seen an increase of, what 2 degrees C since then? I don’t know the exact number. The point is, this sort of increase is not present anywhere else in the geological record. It takes thousands of years for average global temperatures to naturally increase to a point like this one. There are literally no hard spikes–until the industrial revolution began. The only credible takeaway is that humans are the problem.

      • wiz@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only way to win with these people is to not play

      • Eheran@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        You are actually incorrect. Of course there are massive spikes like when a meteor hits or a super volcano erupts. But A that is not relevant. And B records can not show this, they don’t have the chronological resolution to do that. Kind of the same way you can not measure the growth of hair over one day with a ruler, it is not possible. But over dozens of days it is possible. But how could you then tell if the hair grew much at one day and little on others? Your can’t.

      • jaywalker@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re right of course, but logical arguments aren’t the way with these people. It’s emotional at this point, and that is where you have to meet them.

    • Unquote0270@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      My housemate is like that, came up with some nonsense about how he saw a video the other day about how there was climate change happen when the Vikings were around or something so it’s not as clear cut as people think. And today, with it barely breaking 20 degrees in July, said half jokingly that we need more carbon. The shit summer here this year is fuel for his fire. Complete moron.

      • noodle@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t even waste your breath convincing idiots like that. They are too uninformed on too many topics to be worth investing the effort in. You’ve got a good shot at convincing people who are on the fence but culture warriors who rely on Steven Crowder for their talking points aren’t going to be convinced by anyone or anything.

        • Unquote0270@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I’ve given up on him to be honest. Kind of sad, we grew up together and he used to be quite alternative but has been sliding into someone I don’t recognise. I can’t comprehend it and most of the time I just let him expose what an idiot he’s become. Just the other day he said “Trump wasn’t that bad, he was the best of a bad bunch”. I could hardly believe it… absolutely staggering. But yeah, like you said, it’s a lost cause and he will only get worse and lost in his toxic Facebook groups.

    • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      61
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was having a conversationg with some red necks a few years ago. They were all talking about winter’s not the same here anymore, above freezing half the winter, not as much snow, summer is weird is goes right through October now and we don’t really get an autumn anymore.

      “Weather’s not like it used to be,” one of thems said, and I said, “yep the climate is changing.” They stared at me with their mouths open.

      These retards are literally watching it happen with their own eyes and they still won’t believe it. It’s insane.

        • Techmaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The biggest problem with politics these days is there can’t be ANY overlap between the parties. They can’t agree on ANYTHING. If a democrat says “I like breathing oxygen,” a republican will say he prefers breathing something else. There’s so much that people in both parties agree on in principle, but they can never say it. I think the left is more willing to agree with the right, because the left is more principled, but a republican is simply incapable of telling someone on the left “you’re right and I agree with you.” They instead have to be contrarian about everything. Whatever the left says, never agree with it, and make a statement of complete opposition, no matter what. When the left starts supporting a war against Russia, the right starts supporting Russia. It’s sickening.

      • Lev_Astov@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        While it may be arrogant to insist it’s all mankind’s doing, it’s foolish to assume it isn’t.

        • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          My conservative family loves to use the arrogance argument. What I hear is that they don’t want to believe humans can change the climate, because they’re scared of humanity being responsible or accountable for their actions.

    • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m no climate scientist, but from the research I’ve done, there are phases like this to Earth’s natural climate cycle… Earth has gone through very warm eras, and very cold eras, aka ice ages.

      If you look back at our modern history closely enough, climate science in the early years of the industrial age showed that we were headed towards a new ice age with lower than normal global mean temperatures… Clearly that didn’t come to pass.

      There’s also an unprecedented amount of mammal biomass on the planet (Hank Green did a yt short talking about this recently); and I think it goes without saying that, there’s an astronomical amount more pollution than before.

      Examining the evidence, the climate is changing more rapidly and more extremely than before and the causes for this are obvious to anyone paying attention… Simply, more people & mammal biomass, more industry, with next to no environmental protections that actually make an impact, with massive deforestation and destruction of sea life, where a significant amount of oxygen producing and CO2 filtering is happening.

      So what I’m saying is, yes, there are “warming phases” to Earth’s natural ecosystem, however this rapid and drastic of a change is uncharacteristic of the natural changes or planet naturally goes through. At the very least, people should recognize that the amount of pollution and destruction of the natural ecosystem is damaging our planet’s ability to sustain life… Like human life. So whether the environmental protections are because of climate change or simply a self serving goal of trying to keep our planet habitable by humans, long-term, honestly, everyone should support environmental protections.

  • kemsat@lemmy.tf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    500 years later, Europe finds out their Industrial Revolution has consequences, for everyone. Yay!

  • ax1900kr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    When talking with a past university professor, he told us a big part of the global warming problem was actually a natural cycle the earth goes through every certain period of time.

    • max@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is a natural cycle, yes. But if you look at the graphs, we’ve given that natural cycle a rocket boost to Let’s get fucked town and it’s happening a whole lot quicker than it should.

      • ax1900kr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        A rocket boost? C’mon bro. Al Gore said parts of Florida would be underwater yet he and other companies were buying beach real estate in the early 2000s

  • krashmo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    90
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t worry guys, everything is fine. We just need to [redacted] and this will all go back to normal in no time.

    • nefonous@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know what people are smoking, maybe it’s too much heat, but air conditioning is very common and normal here in Italy too.

      I don’t know what a cooling center is, but there is AC everywhere, and when there isn’t it’s a choice of the owner to avoid installing it.

      Also it’s not the first time we reach similar temperatures sadly. We get around 40°C basically every year. The south of Italy is clearly on a very high and uncommon peak, tho.

      The situation is different in other countries like Germany, northern France or England. Until a few years ago they never needed AC at all so most homes don’t have it and it’s not even that easy and immediate to have it installed

    • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Climate control technology never reached Europe. Every building is a sweltering hellhole, unless youre in the first floor of a concrete building.

      • robocall@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        California offers the public to visit certain public buildings and community centers to cool off for free during heatwaves. It saves lives. It would be great if the Italian government could offer something similar. I know they have some very old buildings, but they have some that could facilitate this. Or they should build more pantheons like in Rome if they reject air conditioners.

        • sthunforgivable@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I read something in the news about inviting people to churches. I wouldn’t know what to do with myself for several hours there, also the seats are pretty uncomfortable. But better than a heatstroke I guess.

      • mr_sparkle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        “And I know I’ve finally accepted that air conditioning is a privilege, not a right.”

        -Ted Lasso

      • someguy3@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You forget how much further north Europe is. You didn’t need ac in many parts.

      • 2Xtreme21@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I buckled and bought a stand-AC a few years ago when I literally couldn’t sleep for days during an insanely hot summer here in Germany. I really try not to use it much but on those days when it’s unbearable it’s literally a lifesaver.

        AC never was popular because it used to be that you never needed it here. You’d have maybe one or two days above 30 a year where I live and that wouldn’t be enough to heat up the concrete walls, so your living space still stayed cool. And at night the temperature would drop and you could simply air out your flat. Now it’s different though and it’s seriously a shame that people still doubt climate change is happening.

        • gloriousspearfish@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Pair it with solar panels, then it doesn’t contribute to climate change and you can run it as much as you want when the sun shines.

          • 2Xtreme21@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Believe me, I would if I could, but my building doesn’t allow us to hang stuff from our balconies. Can’t go about being more energy efficient if it might look too ugly! (/s)

    • nobodyspecial@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      No, air conditioning is rare in Europe. Pretty much only hotels have it, and by far not all hotels. About 5% of private residences have A/C, even in southern regions of France, Spain and Italy.

      Source: Wikipedia, and my kid that went to Italy and Greece and Germany for the previous few summers worth of heat waves.

      Edit: Formal, government supplied cooling centers are a CA thing. Informal ones like shopping centers are more widespread in the U.S., but don’t really exist in Europe.

      • negativeyoda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesn’t even matter all that much. A couple years ago in the PNW when it hit 43°c/115°f, I had my central air absolutely kicking out the jams and it was still 90°f in my house. I got really annoyed before coming to the realization that it was 25° cooler inside which is honestly a pretty decent effort on behalf of my AC. There’s no reason it should be this hot anywhere, but especially Cascadia. Of course my AC couldn’t handle it because it wasn’t designed to. Even a decade ago you’d think someone was nuts if they installed an AC capable of dealing with this anywhere except say Arizona or Florida

        • Thadrax@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          AC doesn’t just help with temperature though, it also helps with humidity if it is a humid heat outside. Makes it much more bearable even if the temperature difference might not be huge.

      • pgetsos@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Greece

        You’d have to search A LOT to find a hotel without AC in Greece, except maybe in very mountainous areas. It is probably in 90%+ of the homes on cities and it becomes more and more widespread even in villages and towns where you would never need it a few years ago. The; have been popular for more than 30 years in Greece

      • tal@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        My understanding is that it is more common in offices, though, than in residences.

        • sveri@lemmy.sveri.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Here in Germany not even offices have them. Well, most of them. AC is a luxury that no one needed like 5 years ago. 5 years in the future this will have changed, obviously.

          • kimchi_boy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Are you installing A/C? Or, at least a portable unit? I hope you guys can stay cool. It took me quite a while to become acclimated to no ac after I moved there for a number of years.

            • sveri@lemmy.sveri.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I bought a portable unit last year and used it for the hottest days, as I was working from home in a small room which heats up quickly.

              I also bought it for safety reasons, we are for people in our household and in case a long lasting heat wave comes we at least have the means to cool down one room for the night where we all can sleep.

            • Thadrax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’ve thought about it in recent years but so far, at least where I live, it is still manageable without. Days where it doesn’t cool down enough during the night to survive the next day (opening/shutting windows and blinds) are still rare and don’t last more than a few days at a time and it takes a bit for the house to really heat up.

              If/when that changes and heat waves with still hot/humid nights get more common or longer, I’ll have to get a solution for at least a room or two.

          • kimchi_boy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Are you installing A/C? Or, at least a portable unit? I hope you guys can stay cool. It took me quite a while to become acclimated to no ac after I moved there for a number of years.

        • delirium@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Yeah its pretty standard to have in offices and shops, but not in apartments or houses. I’ve seen couple of ceiling fans in Spain, but here in France some people don’t even use regular floor fans for some reason lol

          To be honest, we only get 2 hot months in a year (usually, though its starting to change and now its more like 3 hot months where 2 are extra hot)

          • nobodyspecial@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I used to specifically not want A/C in my cars back in the 90s living in Denver. It was never hot enough to need it. In the past years I’ve spent quite a few days sitting in stopped traffic in my open Jeep with the thermometer reading 104-107F. Once was behind an uncovered manure truck. Good times, good times.

            Where I live now (further north from CO) there’s a massive junk yard with thousands of snowmobiles. Apparently my current area used to be a mecca for snowmobiling in the 70s and 80s, with 1500 miles of snowmobile trails. It snows maybe 3 times a year now, average of 10 inches total per season. Neighbors all around me have every kind of motor toy imaginable, but I have not seen a single snowmobile. My snowblower hasn’t been seen use in over 4 years, and the city routinely forgets how to plow or sand streets.

            Weather definitely got hotter year round over 3-4 decades. I’ll fight fellow Gen-X and boomers over this.

            • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              It really shouldn’t even be a fight… we’ve had accurate thermometers for a long time now, and weather stations all over the world at airports at the very least. Taking an average of the temperatures around the world isn’t really some crazy advanced science.

      • DazedQuasar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’m Italian, lived both in big cities and in small villages, both in the north and the south of the country: basically every office has AC, never saw an hotel with no AC and I’d say at least 50% of private residences have it.

        AC in private residences has become much more common in the last years due to the climate crisis but 5% would’ve been way off even 20 years ago. Your data is definitely incorrect

        Edit: https://www.qualenergia.it/articoli/meta-famiglie-italiane-ha-condizionatore-ecco-come-usa/ some data. About 50% of private italian households have AC, with obvious differences between regions and local climates.

    • grasib@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Central aircon is pretty standard for most large buildings but individual aircon systems for private housing is rare, mainly because it is only very hot for a short period of time.

      • anchr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is becoming more common in northern Europe, which sounds counterintuitive, because heating during winter is a far bigger issue here than cooling during summer.

        However, many private houses get ‘heat pumps’, which gives you more heating pr kW than pure old-fashion electric heating would have given. Basically it is a backwards airconditioner.

        These heat pumps can also be run backwards, and then they function as aircondition.

    • Shritish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      85
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you mind posting something meaningful instead of a tired and boring aphorism?

      • CeruleanRuin@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        To what end? You think a user comment on Lemmy is going to change emissions policies? Direct your ire somewhere it might actually make a single bit of difference instead of just perpetuating the infighting that gets nothing done. If you’re going to waste your time on the subject, spend your thumb-taps on an email to your congressman instead.

      • sin_free_for_00_days@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was so hoping that crap like this, FAFO, and the other weak sauce bullshit wouldn’t make it over here. I was stupid for even hoping that.

        • vimdiesel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s literally impossible when you’re on the internet, you just hope to see less of it.

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not like posting anything meaningful here will change anything. The fuckheads that put the world in this situation laugh at our faces and of anyone who tries to undo their shit. They have money, what are we going to do? Sue them? They’ll buy every lawyer everywhere. Ask for political reforms? Yeah, maybe in 2050 something might pass. Picket outside the companies? Gee, that worked so well with Occupy Wall Street, didn’t it?

        • Gadg8eer@lemdit.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You realize there’s only two ways this is going to be dealt with, right? One, we have to murder the rich assholes who invested in fossil fuel production. Two, everyone needs to be able to migrate everywhere; climate migration is going to have to be embraced, even if it means a bunch of selfish bastard conservatives don’t like the economic fallout. But no, that’s not good enough for any of you to look at and say “okay, we have a chance to make the most of this”.

          My childhood in the late 90s and early 00s was STOLEN from me by government cronies who literally ripped me away from my family for several years. I lived in BC, Canada. I was BORN here in Canada and my dad and grandfather were as well. There’s no reason I alone shouldn’t have gotten to enjoy that period, playing Pokemon and Neopets in my parent’s home.

          But no. Thanks a lot to all you fuckers, the economic golden age that has existed since the 50s is gone forever and I’ll never live to see anything remotely as optimistic. I hate all of you and if this whole damn planet doesn’t choke on you not giving up just a bit of comfort so people less fortunate than you don’t have to struggle just to make ends meet, I will literally start setting oil refineries on fire. GO FUCKING DIE, EVERY LAST ONE OF YOU.

      • LEX@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Hey! Stop goofing off on the internet!”

        • whatsarefoogee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not about being goofy. It’s about repeating the same damn thing for the millionth time. It gets annoying and adds no value to the conversation.

          • The_Nostromo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That’s what I really disliked about what reddit had become. A post with 500+ comments and having to scroll through the same fucking comment over and over again because everyone thinks they’re so fucking clever but didn’t bother to read any of the comments and see that a dozen other schmucks have made the exact same comment.

            • lapommedeterre@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Ahh, I see. Interesting read/study. I wouldn’t say they call it the Faustian bargain, but an example of a Faustian bargain. I suppose they could call it the Faustian bargain of GHG reduction, so that it doesn’t usurp the term entirely, haha.

              (Also I was referencing lyrics from the captain planet theme :P)

            • Nepenthe@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Bjørn Samset of the University of Oslo and his colleagues used four climate models, which cover a range of climate sensitivities, to see what would happen to the global average temperature if the short-lived greenhouse gases (methane, nitrous oxide etc) were kept at their current level, but CO2 emissions ceased once they have reached a level of 420 parts per million (ppm). (This is 15 ppm above the current level of 405 ppm, or just another five years of emissions at the current rate.)

              The result was average warming of 1.35°C over the four models, above a late 19th century baseline. (It has been demonstrated that global average temperatures increase while CO2 is increasing, and then remain approximately constant until the end of the millennium despite zero further emissions.)

              You know, when I was a kid, I kind of had this thought that maybe nobody was doing anything because there was nothing to be done. I was wrong on that, and it would still be unequivocally better the sooner we do this. But I wasn’t entirely wrong, and here we are. If we stopped yesterday, this shit would last into the next millennium!?

              If nothing else, at least it made me very conscious of enjoying everything I had.

      • nexusband@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yes, we. While some are of the impression, that climate change is only because of a select few, it’s because every single one of us consumers is to blame as well.

        We have the option to buy climate friendly stuff, lots of times it’s just more expensive or maybe a little bit inconvenient. Also, why does one need the next new iPhone after owning the last one for just over a year? Why do we have to eat Avocados in some cases a few times a day, that are shipped around the world and need heaps of water to grow? Same as Bananas or Strawberries in Winter…the list is very long. Same as plastic free vegetables - “the cucumber has a brown spot? Nope, not getting that, I demand it’s spotless!” So companies wrap them in plastic.

        If there’s demand, companies will fulfill that demand, if there’s no demand, companies stop doing that shit, because it doesn’t make any money. Every single one of us is responsible in some way or another, even if the percentage is very miniscule.

        • The_Terrible_Humbaba@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I just wanted to say, this is a very good comment.

          When people say it’s not “we” and it’s just a few people, or just companies, it always seems to me that they are - consciously or subconsciously - just making excuses for not having to actually do anything and hoping someone else will solve the problem for them. They want the problem to be solved, while not having to do anything or change their lifestyle.

          There are some very obvious and clear examples of this; here’s two of them:

          • Studies have shown most people are in favour of carbon taxes. But with carbon taxes, companies would just shift the extra cost onto the consumers by increasing prices. One thing affected by carbon tax, would be the price of gas itself. And when prices (especially gas prices) increase, that usually results in a lot of anger and protests. So why would any democratically elected politician ever implement a carbon tax? If they did, they would be voted out, and the next one to come in would just undo it.

          • Another obvious example, is meat. We know one of the major protagonists in CO2 emissions is animal farming. Red meat especially is responsible for a huge source of those emissions. And yet most people don’t even wanna think about eating less meat, and they will still crack jokes about vegans and look at them sideways. And as for regulations regarding meat, the example from before still applies.

          As you seem to be implying, what really needs to happen is a whole cultural shift. Trying to shift blame onto to a few people and hope they get the guillotine, won’t change anything as long as people keep demanding all the same things because then someone else will come in to fulfil that demand. Whether we like it or not, we have to accept that it’s the sum of all our actions that will determine the future, and our actions can influence other people’s actions; therefore, one way or another, we are all responsible.

          Sorry for typing some much at you since you’re basically making the same point already, but I just felt like adding on.

          • nexusband@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            To add to this, a simple example: Carbon Taxes are unavoidable. However, i wish people would stop arguing about what’s better (EVs or Synthetic Fuels), because in the end, both have their use cases. It’s a bit like iOS or Android. iOS and Android are very different, but also quite similar. I’m a HUGE petrol head and fossile fuels have to die as soon as possible and most governments around the world go about it completely wrong - i want to pay 2,50 Euro per Liter for 100% carbon neutral fuel, but i can’t because no country around the world actually does this properly (except maybe Sweden with HVO Diesel)

            Meat has to get simply more expensive and the market will regulate that - which is also going to happen with carbon taxes, but it’s relatively slow.

    • jarfil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Most of the “we” who fucked around, are either already dead or dying of old age. They won’t find out a thing.

      The “we” who believed and trusted them… along those who didn’t… yeah, those “we” will find out.

      • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I wouldn’t just put this on those generations, Exxon and the oil industry and their government dogs and very wealthy and powerful people and their minions are who deserves the most of the blame, the rest of us were powerless to stop it or brainwashed by the propaganda and disinformation being produced by the oil industry and their many allies, like Kenneth Hamm and the Young Earth Creationist movement, the American GOP, the British Tory’s, Putin’s Ruzzia, The Gulf states, the auto industry, and so many more.

    • DrQuint@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I dunno what I could have done, everything I try to have an impact on is always a pittance compared to the size of the problem, but I know what I can do going forward.

      I’m quitting. I’m having zero children. Good luck, have fun the rest of you.

    • HELM108@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meanwhile, the fossil fuel industry: “we’re just trying to find the guy who did this!”

  • Neutrino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Simple way to convert Celsius to Fahrenheit in your head:

    1. Take the Celsius value and double it

    40 * 2 = 80

    1. Subtract 10%

    80 - 8 = 72

    1. Add 32

    72 + 32 = 104

    40 C = 104 F

    This is still hot but a far cry from 118F

    • bossito@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess the op added it to the title, but on the article the conversion is from 48°C to 118F

    • Clbull@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I actually appreciate the simple guide on how to convert celsius to freedom units. I guess to convert F to C, we’d do the opposite (subtract 32, add 10%, then halve.)

      • steltek@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is what I do. My full mental list:

        • -11C -> 11F ^^(really 12 but close enough)^^
        • 0C -> 32F
        • 4C -> 40F
        • 16C -> 61F
        • 28C -> 82F
        • 40C -> 104F

        It provides enough buckets to be conversational.

    • FringeTheory999@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      yeah, 104 a spring day in bakersfield California. But we have AC and stuff. if they’re not used to those temps they might not be prepared for it

      • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We usually do not have AC here (for example in Germany). Not even in hospitals, schools, elderly care, etc. The solution of our government, after many people already died because of heat, is to make shelter rooms somewhere in the city where you can go when it’s getting too hot. That’s how “prepared” we are.

        Also, the majority of people here do not own a home but instead are dependable on their landlord to do something against the heat. Which is obviously not happening. So instead those people who have the money for it start buying free standing AC units. Which need a pipe to hang out of the window and are highly inefficient.

        • billytheid@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Use an evaporative cooler! All you do is chuck ice in it. Cheaper to run, easier to recycle and arguably more effective for small home/apartment living.

          Source: Australia

          • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Thank you! I’ve never heard of these before. Households here usually do not have ice, but I see it also works with cold packs

            • billytheid@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              Cold packs are FAR superior, I just can’t fit enough in my freezer while still having room to make ice cubes

        • FringeTheory999@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah, that’s what I figured. I’d heard that a lot of europe lacks warm weather infrastructure and most homes lack the basic air conditioning that is ubiquitous here in the US. I don’t see a lot of fixes for that.

          • Rodeo@lemmy.ca
            cake
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The solution is the for the rich landowners to spend their fucking money and retrofit building with central air.

            The solution is as simple as always: the rich must spend money.

            • Alenalda@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Sure if you never plan to leave the house this is fine. The energy for all those ac have to come from somewhere so let’s burn some more CO2, I’m sure that won’t make it worse.

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I agree but they will just shift the costs onto the renters. That’s how we do gentrification

    • TheMauveAvenger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It would do absolutely nothing at all. For every billionaire that is running some seedy enterprise that you don’t like, there are dozens if not hundreds of well paid people that are supporting that enterprise and would keep it going going forever.

      • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, the vast majority of human kind would gladly own a multi billion dollar company even if that company were causing climate change.

        • jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I would gladly own one, I would also gladly pivot it towards not causing climate change.

          Only problem is owning one in the first place; most are “publicly owned” by a bunch of investors who themselves are investment funds owned by some other bunch of investors like those putting their money in 401k plans.

          It’s a nice tangle of cross-ownerships that ends up hurting the actual owners without them having any power to change anything.

      • billytheid@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        You know what the French nobility did when the people started to, quite rightfully, remove their heads? It sure wasn’t move in to the newly vacant palace…

    • SaltyLemon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you were on reddit: “You have been permanently suspended for threatening to use violence.”

      • Clbull@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I always thought Lemmy (at least this instance) had stricter rules than Reddit. Seeing a comment here that outright wishes for billionaires to be culled is a huge culture shock.

        • billytheid@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s also a VERY popular sentiment the world over

          But also Reddit admins are total deadshits, I was permanently banned and then harassed on other platforms for pointing out that Pitbulls are banned in Australia and that we euthanise them, and any other violent animals(just said that was a law here, nothing else). Crazy dog fuckers wouldn’t leave me alone.

          • jarfil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I got banned from Reddit, then when I sent an appeal, got permabanned on the alt account too for “repeated violations”.

            Damned if they say you did, damned-er if you say you did not.

            At least Lemmy has a modlog for everyone to see (until some instance decides to scrub that… but I wouldn’t like to stay on one of those).

          • jarfil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The comment itself is still there, just hidden. You can see it in the modlog, page source, or some apps.

        • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          1 year ago

          Because we aren’t worried about offending advertisers. This is what real people think without being forced to be advertiser friendly.

    • hglman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Start at the top and keep going down the list until emissions fall far enough.