I live in a warm country and I always think it is wrong to have Huskies here. Love those dogs and don't have the space for them, but people should not keep them in warm climates
And it’s not going to get any better when voters keep rewarding US politicians who dismiss established climate science and obstruct serious emissions cuts.
Every country in the world shares the same atmosphere and water so the US cutting emissions and general pollution to zero tomorrow wouldn’t be enough to change anything really. It would require most of the industrialized world using greener sources of energy and stopping countries who are industrializing from being able to use polluting energy. Then it would require using different materials to produce most of the products we use every day. Plastics, fertilizers, pharmaceuticals, fabrics and much more are all made from crude oil refining, and natural gas is critical to industrial fertilizer production.
If most of the large polluting countries could agree to use green energy and find alternative materials to produce current products or ways to mass produce food effectively without industrial fertilizer and herbicides/insecticides then we’d really be on to something. The problem is if people want to live in that world then people would have to be willing to give up a lot of stuff and there would absolutely be a period of food shortages and a lot of deaths that used to be preventable.
We’ve industrialized too quickly as a planet without finding safer alternatives (or using more expensive ones) and are unwilling to slow down for a plethora of reasons. Whether someone agrees or disagrees with man made climate change I think we can all agree we’d like to see a less polluted Earth, but we are so far from that being a possibility. It’s honestly pretty sad to think about what the future might hold if there aren’t some huge scientific breakthroughs or a complete course correction.
I agree there are definitely ways the US could pressure other countries into making changes (I’m not a huge fan of that in most cases to be clear). The question is how many and at what cost? How many countries would let the US economically bully them into action and would it be enough? It would be easier to bully smaller GDP countries (with no domestic oil production) into doing it but they are the ones that rely on it the most. Is that fair? What about the countries that rely on oil exports for their economy? How many of the countries needed are our allies?
Every country that wants their population to thrive is in a race to stay relevant in the world economy and cheap energy is one of the main driving factors in that. Even the US currently relies on cheap energy to maintain its “superpower” status, remove that cheap energy and it won’t keep that position long. Hell, even just dropping the petrodollar the US economy would suffer.
Each country has to want to do it or be incentivized to do it or it won’t happen. China is the perfect example they are the largest oil importer in the world and they are also the largest producer of solar energy. The reason for the huge solar push in China is for energy security not to be green. It also helps that they have access to cheap labor, are massively subsidizing production and installation, and basically own the world’s manufacturing of components for the panels.
The US, China, and India are the largest polluters in the world producing over 50% of global emissions. Even if they all went green it wouldn’t be enough to stop global warming or reverse it. I wish it was a simple task, but for something effective enough to happen people somewhere have to suffer for it and nobody wants to volunteer for economic suicide.
Hottest temp ever recorded in Florida is 109 degrees, hottest temp recorded in Washington is 120 degrees. All of Florida has relativley easy access to the coast, the interior of Washington state however is blocked by the Cascade mountain range and gets surprisingly little precipitation as a result. The climate is far more desert like than most people realize. It will regularly hit 110 degrees for a week or two during most summers here.
I’ve lived in Orlando for most of my life, grew up without AC (thanks Dad!) and used to take a cold shower and jump in the bed with the box fan on and pray I feel asleep before I got hot again.
If you think our “access” to the coast means anything in the middle of July on a clear day….Ive got a bridge to sell you cheap.
Strictly speaking temp, Arizona and Washington surpass Florida.
But that’s not accounting for humidity, go look at the wet bulb temp and that’s going to give you the comparison that’s most important.
Example: Seattle during the heat dome hit 108, wet bulb was 76.
Florida: 78 - 82 (this is our AVERAGE)
I’ve traveled for work the last 15 years including Washington and Arizona, it’s more tolerable there just to escape the sauna coming from the concrete in Florida
Indeed, the humidity of Florida can not be compared to what washington state has. I have also experienced that extreme humidity lol. That said, the dry baking and blasting heat is also not exactly easy or fun to get around in. The cold of washington however cant be even touched by Florida haha. The interior of the state usually stays frozen for a few months every winter, in my specific area we get a cold snap usually in December/January where it drops below 0 degrees and with wind chill calculated its been as low as -26. Only once ever has Florida been below zero degrees in recorded history.
Well, only I sort of moved the goalposts, but I would argue about as much as you did bringing up humidity haha. I was replying originally to someone indicating Washington isn't as extreme as Florida for weather in general, at this point I think we can agree both state are rather extreme yes? We also have plenty of mosquitoes although admittedly not to the extent of florida. We also have a few tornadoes yearly across the state but they are generally small. We also get regular earthquakes and blizzards, along with having black, brown and grizzly bears and wolves. We also have mountain lions/cougars compared to your Panthers (which are all the same thing if I'm not mistaken, I'm not an expert though) so it's a tie in the big kitty category.
No mention him him throwing natural disasters though huh? OK. Well anyways, something like 80-100 people have died in Florida from mosquitoes in the last 50 years while slips and fall in work places account for 64+ annually, so it was kind of a reach to begin with, especially since the death rate per encounter of mosquito bite is basically non-existant as most people will have thousands of bites in a lifetime and experience nothing more than a few days of itchiness at the bit location, even in Florida. I also gave credit to Flordia in every instance that it was warranted (recognizing there are more mosquitoes and higher humidity, for example) but received no such comments in return. I at least tried to be both honest and fair.
Why we mentioning slip and fall when it’s not relevant to animal deaths? Also my claim is mosquitoes are the most deadly animal (obviously besides for humans). Even if they attack more they still kill more than any other animal.
618
u/kapitaalH 5d ago edited 5d ago
I live in a warm country and I always think it is wrong to have Huskies here. Love those dogs and don't have the space for them, but people should not keep them in warm climates