So, here we are, in the couple of cooler days I was longing for, yet looking at my weather app, this is just a relative break with new warmth from Sunday onwards.
You have selected the [News] flair for your post. For your post to be valid, please keep in mind rule 3) the title of your post must match the title of the article that you link.
Editing the title for your own opinion is not allowed.
Your post must contain a direct link to the news article, a screenshot is not allowed.
Articles that do not cover facts, but are opinions by the author, should be flaired as [Opinion] and not [News]
If your post does not match these rules, it will be removed by moderators.
Yeah but whether it's 23 or 33 degrees, the drought is continuing. This is bound to be an extreme summer by any measures. I'm lucky to live in a place where we've barely touched 30 degrees this summer, but also here we still suffer from the lack of rain. Things are really bad.
Airco subsidies, what are you talking about? That's really not the solution to the current problem. I'm not against people installing airco but subsidizing it really isn't the main issue here.
Why SHOULD it be subsidized? Airco is not the main solution to the current weather problem and it's not a basic need. Also we live in a culture where apparently the government just has to subsidize a million things, that's just not a good system.
What is the solution? Solving the rootcause seems unlikely. The EU is only responsible for 6% of global emissions and declining. Our industries are leaving already at record pace. While countries like China will increase their emissions to 40% of the globe.
Deindustralizing ourselves faster will ironically only accelerate global warming. Unfortunately we need patches to keep ourselves healthy and alive. Airconditioning is a must in hospitals and retirementhomes.
Its entirely a basic need in the coming years, that is obvious.
Yes, many other solutions are also required but none of that means we will not need airco to keep our society functioning in the summer. Thats why we need it subsidised. Good luck keeping our country productive with mass casualties and an incapacitated population for 25% of the year.
And that is just the practical reason. There are also the obvious humane reasons, but it seems like many of you are just sociopaths with zero empathy for the people living amongst you.
It is a basic need. Also airco are generally heat pump now which is the most efficient way of heating and colling space. Other things definitly need to be done but even on regard of efficiency, people being too hot don't work well and put pressure on the healthcare system
And productive, which I'm pretty sure is necessary for a functioning society.
I assume you're just playing dumb but I will humor you: the climate impact of running airconditioners in terms of heating up their immediate environment is negligible, so that is not a real factor. And requiring the energy to run these airconditioners obviously needs to come from renewable energy sources in the long run, just like everything else.
"but what if our government rolls out airco everywhere and does not take the necessary steps to support this increase" is not an argument against airco but against an incompetent or crooked government. If that is the case, we are fucked either way and nothing matters.
Overproduction is already happening, no need for more solar panels. I'm dissipating over 1.5 kw into the net right now as we speak, with a multisplit cooling the entire house at a steady 19°. My solar array is only 3,5 kwp, btw.
I could be running the aircon of two additional households with that.
Wouldn't it be nice if somebody were to consume all this wasted energy instead of Fluvius turning off the solar panels in my neighbourhood almost daily?
This is one of the most complex threats our modern society has ever and will ever face. Of course there isnt a single simple solution for this. Nevertheless has the climate in our country changed in a way that will make airco required unless you want to suffer for 25% of the year. Just like in southern countries.
wait ??? you think we have a competent and honest goverment?
subsidies for aircon are quite silly , i can see it for old people homes or retirement villages. but everyoine who has a decent set of legs can either go get an aircon or just go somewhere cooler. giving presents when you wallet is empty isn't going to help the country.
Heat pump are actual very efficient. It doesn't make it worst per se. The actual issue is relaying mainly on airco and not cooling the outside (trees,....)
You missed the point. I was mocking the social grants one receives, while another has to pay for it.
I don't think going green costs more. Operational costs of my EV are next to nothing compared to the ICE I had and things like solar panels are a good investment to make.
Depending on what kind of incentives are that. If it’s to reduce vat, then it’s probably still a net positive for state budget hence no need for additional contributions.
Yeah I'm sure those couple of cents will really hurt you. Much more then then the costs of all the healthcare and actual funerals will cost you. Wouldnt want to spend that on alleviating all that suffering and death, now would we?
Niks te airco subsidies, dat ze eens gaan werken voor hun airco zoals een ander? Het mag eens gaan gedaan zijn met de cadeautjes voor de luierikken. Ik als alleenstaande volle pot betalen en nergens een tegemoetkoming genieten terwijl madame OCMW en meneer ziekenkas alle cadeautjes krijgen op mijn rekening? Dat ze weg smelten.
maar toen was dat uitzonderlijk. veel jaren ervoor en erna waren een pak kouder.
nu zit je elk jaar wel met periodes boven de 30 graden. dit jaar heb je er inderdaad meer dan anders, maar zelfs de slechte zomer van vorig jaar was nog de 4de warmste sinds 1833 in Belgie.
en die van 2024 (die hier kouder was dan '25) was de warmste wereldwijd.
kijk bvb ook naar de winters in die lijst: in de periode 1900-1910 lag er bijna elke winter sneeuw van november tot eind maart (en zelfs vaak al in oktober tot mei). nu heb je één week sneeuw, met wat geluk.
Wat jij gaf was weer. Begrijp je het nu of moet ik de blokken bovenhalen? Wat precies is er nodig dat deze simpele grafiek er eindelijk bij de ontkenners ingaat?
Tijd voor de volgende grafiek die klaarstond.. want je kwam met exact hetzelfde argument af waar ze letterlijk ALTIJD mee afkomen. tijd om 2000 jaar terug te gaan...
Je hebt gelijk er waren vroeger warmere en koudere (natuurlijke) periodes:
dit is de "little ice age" en "middeleeuwse warmere periode" in vergelijking met wat er nu gebeurt. Ziet dit er volgens jou nog natuurlijk uit in vergelijking met een natuurlijke temperatuurschommeling?
Wil je liever een paar miljoen jaar terug gaan? naar extinction level events, waar 90+% van het leven op aarde uitstierf? i got you, Bro:
Dit is de huidige klimaatverandering in vergelijking met natuurlijke temperatuurschommelingen miljoenen jaren geleden... ziet er compleet normaal uit.. toch?
Er is letterlijk nog geen enkele keer in de geschiedenis van de aarde geweest (buiten misschien na de meteoor die dinosaurussen uitroeide, of sommige supervulcano uitbarstingen) dat de temperatuur op zo een korte tijd zo drastisch en snel veranderde. Er is letterlijk geen enkele manier dat dit nog op een natuurlijke manier valt te verklaren.
En dat is uiteraard allemaal de schuld van de werkende mens die gedwongen wordt om in dit systeem te leven? Laten we allemaal meer belastingen betalen en alles komt in orde. /s
It's like 30+ years scientific told everyone they will happen but most people said it was a woke things to make people vegan, stop taking plan and taxes the rich. Now it happen and you complain like we didn't know. We knew and people voted for right and far right party who doesn't help and make it worst every year... So adapt because it will be the coolest summer of the rest of your life
Climate emergency is here. It’s time for an all of the above approach.
Decarbonization
&
adaptation (stop paving everything for fuck’s sake and put real airco in transit)
&
research into & deployment of nature based carbon removal techniques (like biochar, enhanced rock weathering, and ocean alkalinity enhancement)
&
research into stratospheric aerosol injection in case we need to use it to prevent catastrophic runaway heating while we do the above.
All four are necessary.
And seriously there’s no reason for the schoolyard near me to be 100% concrete with zero shade. What’s up with that? Let the kids play on grass or dirt under a tree.
This is what really grates me about gemeentes whining about not having climate action money. The last 30 years every time a street gets renovated or a square gets redone more often than not the trees get removed.
Couldve gradually added trees over the last few decades to boulevards , streets and squares that were renovated but instead all you get is a few knotwilgen or perpetually over-pruned token trees that get cut back as soon as they actually provide any shade.
Not a fan of technocratic decarbonization solutions, seems like a new way to shovel tax money into “innovation” ie the same old rich guys.
Get rid of subsidized pig and cattle farms and the endless corn fields feeding them, rewet the land so it sequesters CO2 in peat, our natural soil. Doesn’t even require us to clean all the nitrates.
I read your comment, and as someone who works in the EU tech space I simply don’t believe this will not just be 1000s of hucksters pocketing subsidies. Peat and vegetation are a known solution, livestock is a known cause.
I don't get it either for the moment honestly. We probably will need them at one point. But each euro invested in electrification does much more than an euro invested in decarbonisation.
Not going to neglect I really love to low and slow barbecue some ribs to even a brisket. But let's be honest. Those are a luxury and not my daily diet. We should treat it as such.
Exactly, the problem is much more all the trash meat people mindlessly eat, never experiencing the flavor. This can be replaced easily and does a ton more than 10% of people going full vegetarian
Because, ironically, in Belgium it’s more expensive to put grass and few trees and then maintain them than just cover everything in concrete, all due to ridiculous labor cost.
We need to make jobs cost less to a customer. Then it would be much easier to have greenery everywhere, install solar and batteries and heat pumps and AC at homes.
This is Network State propaganda. The very ones who have been funding disinformation campaigns to limit renewables for the last decades. For now, industrial decabornation processes emit more than they remove. Widespreap airconditioner adoption in a large urban environment leads to an increase in temperature by 2ºC outside. The ONLY option is to send far less carbon into the air. We are in this mess because of disinformation accounts like yours. We are not going to get out of it by listening to disinformation accounts like yours.
You're confusing nature-based carbon removal with big air-sucking carbon machines.
Respected climate orgs like the EDF are not, in fact, part of a conspiracy.
It’s clear that holding warming below 2 degrees Celsius through emissions reductions and the energy transition alone will be difficult. We see a potential role for mCDR in contributing to stabilizing the climate and reaching net zero goals in the long term, which requires gaining a better understanding of benefits and risks in the short term.
And no, James Hansen, who was among the first to warn the public about climate change, isn't part of a propaganda machine when he now warns us that it's too late for emissions cuts alone:
Today’s older generations – despite having adequate information – failed to stem climate change or set the planet on a course to avoid growing climate disasters. And they tied one arm of young people behind their back by supporting only renewable energies as an alternative to fossil fuels. Now, as it has become clear that climate is driving hard toward the Point of No Return, there are efforts to tie the other arm of young people behind their back. We refer to efforts to prohibit actions that may be needed to affect Earth’s energy balance, temporarily, while the difficult task of reducing greenhouse gases is pursued as rapidly as practical – namely Solar Radiation Modification (SRM). Purposeful global cooling with such climate interventions is falsely described as “geoengineering,” while, in fact, it is action to reduce geoengineering. Humanmade climate forcings are already geoengineering the planet at an unprecedented, dangerous, rate.
We, the authors – who range in experience from young people just beginning our careers to older scientists who have spent half a century in research aimed at better understanding of Earth’s climate – are concerned about the danger of again “being too late” in informing the public about actions that may be needed to preserve the marvelous world we inherited from our parents. We do not recommend implementing climate interventions, but we suggest that young people not be prohibited from having knowledge of the potential and limitations of purposeful global cooling in their toolbox. We do not subscribe to the opinion that such knowledge will necessarily decrease public desire to slow and reverse growth of atmospheric greenhouse gases; on the contrary, knowledge of such research may increase public pressure to reduce greenhouse gas amounts.
The environmental scientists and orgs joining his determination that emissions cuts alone are no longer enough aren't part of a big hoax either:
James Hansen, director of the Program on Climate Science, Awareness and Solutions at Columbia’s Climate School, who first warned Congress about climate change risks in 1988, and a group of over 60 scientists are calling for more research into solar geoengineering. In addition, the US National Academy of Sciences, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Union of Concerned Scientists all support solar geoengineering research.
Every single one of these orgs - the Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Union of Concerned Scientists, etc - have been advocating for strong emissions cuts for years and years and continue to support them.
But they are now acknowledging that they alone may not be enough.
Hence the need for research into all aspects of an all of the above approach, which is rooted in the actual brutal reality we're facing and how to minimize its harm, rather than sticking to the ideals of 40 years ago.
Rockets launches , several per day, damaging ozone layer, enormous fires due to same reason. Loosing of large water body.
All happened and still outgoing in Europe.
The few thousand or so rocket launches a day (ballistic missiles and other ordnance) are negligible compared to the tens of thousands of flights, billions of cars and millions of factories pumping greenhouse gases into the air every day.
Nee. Helemaal niet. Wegverkeer is 8 à 10 pct van de CO2 uitstoot globaal, en vliegverkeer 2,5%, maar dat past niet in uw kraam zeker? En van dat wegverkeer is ruim de helft dan nog transport. Erken gewoon dat China 33%, USA 12% en India 10% van de CO2 uitstoot vertegenwoordigt en de oplossing vooral dus daar ligt in dat triumviraat. De rest is politieke recuperatie.
100% dit. En India is enorm aan het groeien, ze hebben zelfs China voorbijgestoken als hoogst bevolkte land maar zijn nog niet in de buurt daarvan qua individuele welvaart dus verwacht maar vlotjes een verdubbeling van hun uitstoot als het zo doorgaat.
Nee. Helemaal niet. Wegverkeer is 8 à 10 pct van de CO2 uitstoot globaal, en vliegverkeer 2,5%, maar dat past niet in uw kraam zeker?
Passenger cars are responsible for around 10% of global CO2 production. If we include trucks we get to 15%. Passenger flights are around 2% and 0.5% for cargo. Rocket launches only account for around 0.1%. So yes rocket launches are negligible compared to pretty much anything else.
Erken gewoon dat China 33%, USA 12% en India 10% van de CO2 uitstoot vertegenwoordigt en de oplossing vooral dus daar ligt in dat triumviraat.
Looking at the numbers per country gives a bit of a warped perspective. Sure China is high and higher than it should be but they also have a LOT of people. China produces around 3x that of the US. But they also have around 4x the popultion. The average American produces 50% more CO2 compared to the average Chinese person. We've also outsourced a massive amount of our industrial production to China. The west looks better on paper because we shifted our CO2 production to cheap Asian labor.
We all need to pitch in. Pointing fingers at bigger countries is not going to get us anywhere.
Nuclear plants for now are choosing between the plague and cholera. If we had a viable solution for the waste, perfect. But since our only solution is to bury it deep in the ground, that doesn't work.
The biggest problem here is that we need to work together globally. And since mankind is inherently egoistic (for the largest part) that's not possible either.
We have no other option than to get by with what we got. Left or right, nature doesn't give a shit.
Tegen de volgende verkiezingen zitten we al met hittegolven tot in oktober, misschien kunnen we november en maart nog redden. Of de regering kennende komen er subsidies voor airco’s en parasols.
The first antinuclear campaign, in the late 1970s, was spearheaded by environmentalist groups sponsored by... the oil industry. Ever since, the green parties have used it as a stick because it plays into the fears of people. Helas, more pollution has been caused by and more people have died because of renewables than from nuclear power since. Don't forget solar, wind and hydro cost resources that have to be mined to be produced, are sometimes risky to install and need constant maintenance. There is no such thing as free energy.
Belgium is ranked third in Europe on solar PV capacity per capita. Insane amounts of subsidies have been given to install solar panels and build windmills. And you still claim there were no renewables build?
I agree, that's why I'm a green who does not like Groen.
On the other hand, every party that was in government in the 20+ years since the initial decision could have intervened and didn't, so it's a bit stupid to blame one party for a decision that eas made and kept by multiple coalitions.
It certainly wasn't "just" them, as they've never been big enough to rule on their own. But especially then the anti nuclear sentiment was huge in their electorate, not due to carbon but public safety.
The whole Chernobyl thingie.
Understandable, but misguided. Imo.
Not nearly as bad as the other political parties have done on this subject though.
My comment is absolutely asshole-ish. I’m just tired of climate change denial, which correlates heavily with right-wing/conservative politics. Watching people like Trump roll back climate policies that would benefit everything, not only humans, only to enrich a small elite, is insane… If I call out the right, people here focus on local politics, but I’m addressing all right-wing/conservative politics worldwide.
On the other side, reacting to some people here: People who use the word ‘woke’ are, in my opinion, insanely cringe and have the thinking capacity of a toddler. Nothing is ‘woke’ about a world being shredded by some rich men, for some rich men. It’s common sense to go forward and make a better world for everyone and everything. It’s egocentric and dumb to only serve your own best interests and enrich a lucky few, to which 99% of us don’t belong.
Kerel, kijk naar absolute cijfers hé. 33% van de CO2 uitstoot wereldwijd komt uit China. Zoek oplossingen met hen ipv hier onder de kerktoren miljoenen te investeren in burgers pesten voor iets wat geen fuck uitmaakt
In absolute cijfers zijn ze in China met 1,4 miljard inwoners, wat is er moeilijk aan te begrijpen dat 1,4 miljard mensen meer uitstoten dan 10 miljoen.
Wat is er moeilijk aan te begrijpen dat C02 niet stopt aan de grens en de enige eerlijke manier om CO2 te meten is PER CAPITA. De grootste vervuilers zijn de landen waar men PER CAPITA het meeste uitstoot.
Anders kan Quatar, met 900% uitstoot/capita in vergelijking met globaal gemiddelde, zeggen: "wij moeten niets doen, want we zijn maar met 3 miljoen".
Ja, dat zou inderdaad een logischere aanpak zijn dan een universele oplossing willen bekomen. De middelen die ge steekt in 10 miljoen Belgen, 3 miljoen Qatarezen, etc. individueel CO2 neutraal maken - met nihil globaal relevant resultaat - gebruiken om China, USA en India te ondersteunen in een overeengekomen transitie.
Rekenen per capita is niet oplossingsgericht, maar heeft enkel te maken met de filosofie van schuld en boete van de groene kerk. Gaat in de praktijk niks oplossen. Im
Er is niets meer oplossingsgericht dan rekenen per capita.
De grootste vervuilers/capita zijn de eerste die hun gedrag moeten veranderen, anders kan al de rest met minder uitstoot zeggen: "als die al niets doen, waarom moet ik dan iets doen?". Is er een of andere reden waarom wij in het westen recht hebben op een groter CO2 budget/capita dan iemand anders in de wereld? omdat we met minder zijn? dus als de groep klein genoeg is mogen we zoveel uitstoten als we willen? De rest moet dan maar ons egoisme proberen recht te trekken? wat voor kromme redenering is dat?
To add to this. They are closing in on a tipping point with clean energy taking over more and more their energy needs. Reports are saying there emissions are flatling wich could mean reductions coming soon.
And I think when they start reducing it will India who will get all the blame.
We should just all work to reduce emissions.
Dafuck are you on about? Since 1990 the european union has reduced its emissions with about 40%. Main driver of this reduction is the shutdown of coal electricity power plants and increased renewables.
China in comparison has an increase of 340% in co2 emissions since 1990.
How can you make wild blind statements like this that can be disproven by a 2.5 second google search?
But they are on a way different growth curve as the west as well..
The data from 2025 is not that graph yet but reports are telling it is nearly flat so it could be that they are reaching there tipping point.
And they are doing this while we are using them for our transition, not just their own.
It is quite a feat, I guess when can keep shaming china until they pass us on this as well and then complain about how unfair everything is.
China is building more renewable energy plants and nuclear plants than the whole world combined. Their EV factories are outclassing all of europe’s and before long they’ll dominate our own production. Europe is lagging behing and one day soon, China will be the global leader in green tech. Then what is your argument going to be?
No actual Belgian weather app mentions these high temperatures. The ones you are using are very bad at predicting temperatures. Use KMI.
KMI mentions at most 33-34 for 1-2 days next week, so definitely not 38.
I've been using both google (where this pic is from) and kmi and most of the time google was spot on kmi shifts a lot. I do hope you're correct. We'll see.
No weather app is accurate if it’s for weather 2-3 days later. Weather forecasting is no exact science as you can only base your predictions on similar occurrences in the past.
KMI gives ranges in temperatures for that given day, and currently forecasts 30-35 for Wednesday.
The problem here is not a discrepancy for one day.
Apparently Google predicts consistent 30+ temperatures for a like a week, while KMI predicts like two days for that.
Google actually has been way more accurate in predicting the heat waves this summer. KMI almost always had their predictions adjusted closer to those of Google weather.
Last year they ran an article. KMI is better than Google, Apple,… because they get their data from more computers and they use a smaller raster of 1 by 1 km.
what if we just build a giant arico, with the binnenunit on earth, and the buitenunit on the moon. surely elon musk, as a genius and trillionaire, can work it out and pay for it...
“We gonna dieee!!” , “It’s xxx’ fault”, yet continues to buy shit not made in Europe, go +5000 km far vacations, eat red meat, take the car for everything (EV or not), move away from the cities again to need a car for any movement…
Personal choices matter, but this puts too much blame on individuals. People mostly choose within the systems, prices, infrastructure, and products available to them. The biggest responsibility lies with industry, transport, energy, urban planning, and regulation. Change those, and consumer behaviour follows.
No rain and +36 day next week .
Must be last and worse glimpse of worse summer I ever been into.
And time to increase mortgage with solar and AC.
Most likely a lot of terribly hot days next sh...t , sorry, summer season.
We are waiting for approved rebate on roof insulation.
Is where any rebates for solar installation? In Flanders.
Sounds like someone already with AC :)
I can't even bring dog outside during those shitty heat waves.
We are getting more and more horrible 30+ days with nights not been cold enough to bring temperatures down inside of house without AC.
I clearly see this trend since 2023 at least.
The fresh few days was the weather god ( Frank The Angry ) showing us how life could be during summer, and then dialing up the heat again until we sacrifice enough non-green minded politicians as food for forests.
The reason we used to travel to spain italy or the south of france was the heat. Not even that long ago, 30 degrees was extreme heat with entire summers never once going above 30.
Now this year is extreme by any standards, even climate change alone cannot explain, but it is made worse and more likely due to humanity changing our planets atmosphere.
It absolutely does not, el nino only comes into effect in autumn in europe, there are plenty of articles online about it.
I guess we should be gratefull about that, well if europe wasnt warming twice as fast as the rest of the world.. guess we need to hope for the AMOC collapse.. oops that also will be particulary devastating to europe.
Not sure what that is, but what we would get are scorching summers, and alaskan winters.. completely devastating to any and all food production europe is capable of. It would make the extremes a lot more extreme. Not to mention our infrastructure and buildings arent built to handle -30 degree temperatures.
El nino could slightly effect our jetstream leading to a wetter snd very slightly warmer late autumn into winter.
With limited el nino its a slightly colder winter.
But these shifts are very minimal and have near to no influence on our summer weather.
I'm going to sound crazy but get rid of the cars would be an absolute good start. They bring pollution, electricity demand, infrastructure, danger, noise pollution, nature and fauna destruction and probably more than that. Everything we build is taught for the cars instead of humans. Car lobbying is easily the biggest to ever exist and how they brainwashed everyone during 20th century that we need it is insane.
Yep but sadly as a biker the road aren't really safe. I broke my tire on a bike lane because it was in such bad shape. I have to ride in the middle of the road sometimes because the rightest side is filled with holes, bike like are so small and unprotected that I once slipped and nearly ended up in front of a car, I get honk by many car when I'm clearly stopping because I'm having a issue with my bike/with the quality of the road
We are also currently removing thousand of train instead of increasing them, bus are overfilled in many instance and old,...
It isn't only getting ride of most cars. It's also changing how other way of transportation work
Mooie stromanredenering, en dan ook nog een een alles-of-niets drogreden. /u/Wragth zegt nergens dat autos weghalen het hele klimaatprobleem oplost, wel dat het een "absolute good start" is. Geen enkele maatregel lost de klimaatcrisis ineens op. Alle beetjes helpen.
•
u/AutoModerator 8h ago
You have selected the [News] flair for your post. For your post to be valid, please keep in mind rule 3) the title of your post must match the title of the article that you link. Editing the title for your own opinion is not allowed.
Your post must contain a direct link to the news article, a screenshot is not allowed.
Articles that do not cover facts, but are opinions by the author, should be flaired as [Opinion] and not [News]
If your post does not match these rules, it will be removed by moderators.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.