|
|
|
|
|
|
by tome
2122 days ago
|
|
|
> If climate change all happens in a year instead of 100 years, it's big, but not that big. You'd notice it less that the coronavirus. That's interesting. Can you say more about that? It's very much counter to the conventional wisdom (mass death, mass migration, mass starvation, destruction of coastal civilisation, etc..) |
|
|
Due to my hyperbole it's a hard argument that if 100 years happens in one year it'll all be ok.
But yields from crops will improve in some areas and weaken in others
https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2011/02/18/food-se...
So there will be no mass starvation long term, after this super climate change year.
But I see no reason in the USA and Europe if they know what will happen with climate in a year, all the big farms won't adapt within that year.
To put all that change into a year will hammer the poor, but they will adapt within years and I'd see no reason the richer countries couldn't prop them up during the change over.
It's a tough hypothetical. The Netherlands probably couldn't do 100 years of climate change in a year for their dykes... I'm not sure. Maybe they could.
The coronavirus is also a big deal, you'll feel it for decades. What worries about it, is lost time. We are destroying time doing nothing during C19. Climate change 100 years -> 1 year, you'd lost a lot of stuff, but things would plod along.