iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Replies

Robert "The Bobby Yaga" McNees @mcnees.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

“The effect may be considerable in a few centuries.” A New Zealand newspaper posted a short article #OTD in 1912 – 114 years ago – pointing out that burning too much coal would have a negative impact on Earth’s climate. 🧪 paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/R...

The clip reads:

COAL CONSUMPTION AFFECT.
ING CLIMATE.
The furnaces of the world are now
burning about
2,000,000,000 tons of
coal'a year. When this is. burned, uniting with oxygen, it adds about 7,000,000,000 tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere yearly. This tends to make the air a more effective blanket for the carth and to raise its temperature. The effect may be considerable in a few centuries.

76824

Tuton Jackson @treefern41.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

Yes a warning indeed but not the only one at that time. Easing of the north Atlantic climate mentioned by workers over 100 years ago. More recently in 1940s James Fisher in Collins N/N Monographs on the fulmer, Seabirds & prof KH Voous in Atlas of European birds begins with the topic in his intro.

000

Katherine 🏳️‍⚧️ @quadraticink.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

I think this might have been part of the problem, tbh. The idea that we create a "blanket" of IR absorber in upper atmosphere *greatly* underestimates the threat. Imagine a very simple model - no atmosphere, and we put an opaque shell 30km above the surface. Surface temp doesn't change.

100

Dark Jaguar @darkjaguar64.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

We knew from the start, and alternatives existed even then, though early solar power of the time wasn't nearly as effective as just chipping some coal off a nearby rock and using that. The coal deposits of the surface of the earth are gone now, and one way or another, it'll ALL be gone anyway.

100

Robert "The Bobby Yaga" McNees @mcnees.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

“But we didn’t know” “But we couldn’t be sure” “But scientists couldn’t agree” No, we’ve understood the basic mechanism for longer than all but a handful of people on this planet have been alive.

2211

Carl @cellocgw.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

I would retort angrily " adverse effect" but fuck it, the entire world now thinks it's Humpty-Dumpty when it comes to definitions of words.

010

Dan Burns @the-physics-well.net · 14/08/2026

And even if we started doing everything we can to reduce CO2 emissions, the effect of what is already there will be considerable for a few centuries.

000

Carol Rosenbach @carolrosenbach.bsky.social · 14/08/2026

The effect is considerable in just ONE century. Can’t imagine how bad it will get centuries from now. Future generations will be extremely upset with us for not trying hard enough to stop the oil consumption that is happening right now & we have a president who believes that this is all a hoax.

000