*edited to correct conversion in title

  • Neutrino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    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

    • FringeTheory999@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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
        0
        ·
        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.

        • FringeTheory999@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          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
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            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.

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

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

  • tlf@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I really don’t like seeing these temperatures and I also don’t like that governments have not educated the public effectively on what to do to limit climate change. It’s a tragedy to see people making irrational and ineffective descisions out of fear.

  • Legge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    40c is 104f. The article mentions possibly peaking at 48c, which is 118f. In case anyone thought something was a little off

    • Metallibus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Together we can fight at least 1% of the carbon emissions from top 100 corporations in the world :)

      I wish our choices had a 1% impact… That seems extremely generous.

      • TechnoBabble@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        For example…

        Go look at your local Walmart and it’s bazillion products. They expect to sell almost everything in that store multiple times within a month. All that generates enormous waste on a scale that’s literally impossible for the earth to sustain for another 100 years without total ecological collapse.

        We’re living in the single most polluting decade in human history, every decade, since all of us were born. Even if the entire Lemmy user base become subsistence farming monks, the factories would just keep churning out poison unphased.

        I’m not saying it’s bad for people to try and consume more responsibly. I’m just saying it doesn’t make a difference over any meaningful time period until there’s a radical change in how our global economy functions.

        Environmental catastrophe will continue until we literally cannot ignore it, only then will we do anything substantial about it. Unfortunately that’s just how our society works.

        • tlf@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t agree with you. Many individuals changing their behavior is what it takes for an economic shift in our society. By thinking that we don’t have an impact we loose motivation to change our behavior. So if you say you are annoyed by big supermarkets filling our planet with waste that’s fine, I agree. But this needs to lead to a change in behavior, first of yourself, then for those who notice you haven’t died from eating mostly vegan products and buying from local farmers markets and then hopefully for most people in our society.

          Companies produce as long as people consume their products. If commnsumers switch to sustainable products (quite different from products advertised as sustainable) companies will have to follow

    • hardypart@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      These two things have no relation. One is about climate change, the other one about (micro)plastics in the environment and our food chain.

      • anteaters@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Apparently there are still loads of people who don’t understand this simple fact and think everything that is done to make the world a better place is for climate change.

    • anteaters@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      What has that to do with anything? Reducing single use plastics is environmental protection which is not the same as fighting climate change. No one who fights against plastics does so for climate change. Stop spreading such nonsense. Not even your linked article claims something like that.

      • larlyssa@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why would that be orthogonal? Most plastics are created using crude oil and natural gas feedstocks - the creation of these single use plastics directly impacts climate change.

        • anteaters@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Energv wise plastics are often super cheap to produce especially compared to their reusable and non plastic alternatives. IIRC the CO2 footprint is drastically lower for items like bags and straws made of plastic.

    • alcamtar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      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.

      • Enkrod@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        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.

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think climate change is happening far sooner than scientists could have predicted. We focus on increased global average temperatures but I think that we are going to have insanely hot summers sooner. We’re fucked.

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the problem is when you show them the projections people would say “you’re just being alarmist, clearly you have an agenda”

      So the messaging has been consistently toned down in the hopes people would listen.

      They’ve been warning about water scarcity for decades, I think most people accept it’s going to be a thing. Tell them this is going to happen in their country, this decade? Most won’t believe you.

      Doesn’t matter that it’s already at the breaking point, and that we have still growing populations that are already rationing water from sources that aren’t just down due to drought. There’s aquifers that would take centuries to fill back up to where they were decades ago

      Scientists told us “your grandchildren will be screwed”, then “think of the world you’re leaving your children”… Well this generation, they’re not saying “you’re screwed”, because people aren’t ready to hear that

      • the_lennard@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        the messaging has been consistently toned down in the hopes people would listen.

        My guess is its even more than this: deadlines were extended to not let people fall into inaction. The tipping point always close enough so that its dangerous, but still far away enough so that there is still hope. It is a ploy analogous to the fascist “the enemy is strong enough to be dangerous and weak enough to be thoroughly defeated.”

        This scene is far more realistic, I think. But as you can tell, it doesn’t play very well with either the audience or the media.

      • narp@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe it’s more about already being able to see the results of climate change.

        Rivers drying out, ice sheets and glaciers melting, oceans heating up, desertification, water shortages, etc.

        And with everything it seems like we’re “nearly” at a breaking point. Cities running completely out of water, crops failing because of the heat or forests dying or burning, etc.

        At least it feels like we’re not that far away from a really bad time than anticipated.

  • BNE@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    New normal, folks. So begins the era of climate migration.

    A reminder that this is why we should never tolerate selfishness. We’re now largely screwed because we, as a species, valued our individual comfort over expert research.

    We knew what we needed to do - but no, profits. Such a dumb way to die.

      • tryptaminev 🇵🇸 🇺🇦 🇪🇺@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        you will probably not be entirled tobhealthcare in Europe either then.

        Usually the idea is that you pay as a worker into the healthcare system. If you never paid in here you will probably have to fo dor private insurance and you’ll be faced with similiar rates like in the US because the age of entry is crucial for the rates of private health insurance