TADEAS: no jsem to rychle projizdel a nenasel specificky odhad antropogennich emisi pro rok 2020. nicmene ani jsem tam nenasel nic, co by to vylucovalo. to, ze rok 2020 bude tim, kdy bude peak v antropogennich emisi nicmene neznamena, ze se nebude dal oteplovat, oteplovani bude pokracovat jeste desitky let urcite (stale budem pumpovat do atmosfery desitky gigatun sklenikovych plynu)

YMLADRIS: Tak nerad bych se mylil, muze prijit slusny postkrizovy rebound... Ale vzhledem k tomu, ze nez se najde vakcina, nez se nascaluje v potrebnym mnozstvi tak to bude cela rada ekonomickejch trablu a omezeni. Skutecna ekonomicka krize je zrejme teprve pred nama, az podniky vycerpaj svoje zasoby, zacnou padat, zacne se kumulovat druhotna platebni neschpnost etc. A podpurny programy budou ve velky casti sveta navazany na lowcarbon ekonomiku. Takze ja kdybych si mel vsadit, tak bych rekl, ze rok 2019 bude ten s nejvyssimi antropogennimi emisemi.

Total global greenhouse gas emissions were estimated to peak around 2030, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s most aggressive current policy estimates.
However, research from the IEA published in early February found global energy-related carbon emissions had already started to flatten, potentially leading to a peak in global greenhouse gas emissions a decade early.
The IEA’s Executive Director Fatih Birol has since argued that progress made in transitioning the energy production mix could mark 2019 through to 2020 as the definitive year for peak energy-related carbon emissions.
“A significant effort will be needed to ensure that global greenhouse gas emissions don’t just peak but decline rapidly in order to meet climate ambitions,” analysts at Goldman Sachs said.

https://www.cnbc.com/...20/the-coronavirus-crisis-means-we-may-have-already-reached-peak-carbon.html

YMLADRIS: naprostej souhlas. a proto je potreba nasmerovat praci lidstva na tohle usili a ne se zabejvat nakou virtualni zmenou podle moralnich idealu.

ten focus je pak daleko lehci drivovat, pres carbon taxy, nebo subvence do smysluplnejch/dlouhodobe ovoce prinasejicich reseni.

lidstvo se pak samoorganizuje a bude vzdycky inklinovat k tem levnejsim (cimz myslim i subvencovany, nebo carbon taxou nezasazeny) resenim

TADEAS: Tak antropogenni emise velmi pravdepodobne peaknou letos. Je cela rada indikatoru, ze dale neporostou. Prichazejici covidova krize s nama nejakou dobu bude a vsechny vyznamny hraci krome USA imho pujdou postcovid recovery smerem k lowcarbon ekonomice. A Trump velmi pravdepodobne prohraje pristi volby a podle vseho dojde k dost razatntimu obratu i v USA.
Otazka ovsem stale je, jak rychle potom budou klesat, protoze ty mitigacni krivky smerem k 2 stupnum jsou dost sileny. A problem taky je, ze peak nasich emisi antrropogennich emisi, ze dal neporoste koncentrace sklenikovych plynu v atmosfere kvuli uz probihajicim zpetnejm vazbam zemskyho systemu.

GOJATLA: organize social change je pro mě podobně neuchopitelný jako organizovat dekarbonizaci. nevím jak by se to dalo udělat. lidi nemají čas se ani vysmrkat natožpak měnit svoje životy

jinak obecně jako jo, no

GOJATLA: ad 'you need to change your definition of “safe”' -- tohle je hrozne zavadejici. samozrejme, ze penize, bohatstvi, tj. vlastnictvi nebo pravo na uzivani civilizacnich infrastruktur nas chrani, poskytuje urcity zazemi pro urcitou kvalitu zivota. ta definice 'bezpeci' je dobrej smer, ale jen jako skupinovej/spolecenskej proces - my se musime vzajemne presvedcit o tom, ze veci, ktery delame, absolutne nejsou bezpecny a to bezpeci nam neposkytujou do budoucna. v jadru to zas rozezniva tema ty kratkodobosti/dlouhodobosti, tzn. nejsme schopny uprednostnit drazsi (infrastrukturne, investicne) reseni, oproti kratkodobe vyhodnymu, ale dlouhodobe nebezpecnymu. nicmene, ten cas na to tohle resit uz je pryc, ted se to uz vic preklenuje do toho, ze lze sledovat ty dopady tech rozhodnuti, ktery byly ucineny uz s vedomim toho, ze to bezpecny a dlouhodobe vyhodny neni. i se vsema investicema to podle me stejne nebude o mnoho rychlejsi nez co predpovida randers na zaklade socioekonomickejch indikatoru, tzn. zhruba za 10-15 let emise peaknou a zacnou klesat, ale ne na zaklade nejaky nasi extra snahy, ale na zaklade socioekonomicky, investicni dynamiky. to neni zadnej uspech, je to prohra, je to strasne pozde a je to teritorium okolo tech 3 stupnu. jenze pro decision makery vysoko v civilizacni komfortni zone je to porad tolerovatelny riziko, asi, a asi nevidi/me jinou cestu, protoze uprit lidem tu kratkodobou vyhodnost/komfort neni mozny planovane/rizene, ale pouze v dusledku skutecnyho dosazeni limitu.

500 MWp v agrofotovoltaice: Díky nové technologii budou moci zemědělci na svých polích sklízet solární zisky — Solární Novinky
https://www.solarninovinky.cz/...nologii-budou-moci-zemedelci-na-svych-polich-sklizet-solarni-zisky/

Where can you be safe in this world? Maybe we're asking the wrong question | Jane Rawson | Australia news | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/...re-can-you-be-safe-in-this-world-maybe-were-asking-the-wrong-question

Since Greta Thunberg started making headlines, since the IPCC declared we have only 12 years left to get our act together, since the UN’s biodiversity body warned last year of imminent ecosystem collapse, people of run-of-the-mill, middle-class privilege, friends and relatives of mine, have been quietly approaching me, asking, “Where will I be safe? How can I keep my children safe?”

When my co-author and I wrote our handbook, we tried to answer this question. The answer was: nowhere. There is no where that will make you safe, there is only a when: when you become rich enough to build your children a bunker village with its own food and water and oxygen; even less probably when we decide to redistribute society’s benefits so that being rich is not a pre-condition for being safe.

Until either of those whens happen, we suggested, you need to change your definition of “safe”. Stop looking for places to hide and barriers to put up. Build stronger relationships with the people around you so you will be there for one another when difficulties arise. Invest less of your time accruing material goods (like personal water filters) that you could lose in a fire or flood, and more of your time organising for social change. Stay light on your feet, valuing people and experiences more than you value property, and look for a life where those things are nurturing and exciting.

PAD: mas pravdu, ze to sem do uvah nevzal... pak asi opravdu nezbejva nez nejakou syntetiku dovazet, doplnovat to porad plynem, budovat novej typ jaderek - maly reaktory, nebo reaktory na vyhorely palivo a doufat ze klapne brzo studena fuze...

Small modular reactor - Wikipedia
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_modular_reactor


Can Nuclear Waste Spark an Energy Solution?
https://api.nationalgeographic.com/.../news/2010/9/100831-can-nuclear-waste-spark-an-energy-solution

to reseni nebude proste skrz jeden zdroj, ale spis skrz maximalni diverzifikaci.. ale porad bych to videl optimisticky .)

Utility Taps Tesla Megapacks For 1st Energy Storage Installation In Qatar
https://cleantechnica.com/...lity-taps-tesla-megapacks-for-1st-energy-storage-installation-in-qatar/

(CNN)About 3.3 million California homes may lose power during rolling blackouts on Monday and the state's governor is demanding an investigation into the power outages.

The rolling blackouts were implemented over the weekend as an intense heat wave causes record temperatures across the state, including a high of 130 degrees in Death Valley on Sunday.
"We have a perfect storm going on here," said Steve Berberich, CEO of California Independent System Operator (CAISO), which manages most of the state's electrical grid.

More than 3 million homes in California may lose power in record heat wave due to rolling blackouts - CNN
https://edition.cnn.com/2020/08/17/us/california-blackouts-investigation/index.html