I have kids. I am fucking livid that the assholes who pretend climate change isn’t happening have decided to sacrifice their kids and mine on the altar of making a quick buck.
You can’t eat money, assholes. And you can’t bring it with you when you die. If the future is nothing but more and more severe weather to the point that civilization collapses under the strain, then I hope you live long enough to see it and are unable to hide from reality anymore.
Don’t worry about climate change, the US is hell bent on starting global thermonuclear war very soon. We can go fast and crispy instead of slowly choking.
Just curious… I’ll bite… War with who?
Uh huh.
Been hearing this since Bush got elected.
It’s just announced plans to get rid of Mutually Assured Destruction and install nukes in Finland. Then they said they don’t care if their latest weapon ATACMS is used to attack civilians in Russia. This has been a red line for a long time, they just pushed it.
We’re closer to nuclear armoggedon now than ever in your lifetime before.
removed by mod
Psycho.
Fix my stupid rent problem that’s for sure. Of course it will never happen because I would benefit from it slightly.
Fully agree, Putin is a psycho
Uh huh.
They have the money and/or ignorance to continue hiding from reality
They think they do. No amount of money will protect a person from the collapse of a civilization. Never has, never will. Their plans are very much predicated on the assumption that markets will somehow magically continue to function after the general populace has lost all faith in them
They have the money to potentially avoid repercussions long enough. This is especially true when collapse is relatively gradual
What about the ultra rich that have built bunkers and have their security outfitted with locking, exploding collars to keep them in line?
I forget who, but some consultant said that they did a talk with a small group of the ultra wealthy that are doing this.
Edit: This is what I was referring to https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prepper-bunkers-apocalypse-survival-richest-rushkoff
They can buy themselves a few years at best without a functioning supply chain. We all depend on society, no matter how much they like to deny it
I think the reference to collars was more a hypothetical in the article as the author was challenging the bunker dudes how would they ensure the people keeping them safe remained loyal, and that none of them considered anything like “treat them like people before the cataclism”, it didn’t even occur to them at all, instead they proposed a bunch of more controlling measures, which included “disciplinary collars”
These billionaires imagine they’re rich because they’re brilliant, not because they’re the biggest assholes and lucky (and born rich). They overestimate their independence from all the people and other creatures that actually make the planet and human society work. Once they get to their bunkers or their Mars outpost, perhaps reality will gradually get through to them. They can’t escape this using bunkers, rockets and weapons.
The ultra-rich will still be dependent on their retinues of loyal followers, whose loyalties will of course be tested by the collapse of civilization. Unless their retinues are robots, of course.
robots
That’s it! We take all the rich and politicians and stick 'em in “FSD” enabled teslas for a while. The problem will solve itself.
The problem is you having kids…
No… its simply not. Maybe Jimmy John and Mary sue having a dozen offspring in missouri are a slight part of the problem but your average person have one or two is not the problem.
As with everything in this world: Its the corporations. They are the problem. No amount of reuse, reduction, or recycling by any individual would even register on the graph of emissions/carbon footprint when compared to even a tiny company
I do agree that its irresponsible to subject yet another human being to the future we are careening towards
I mean, I get what you are saying, but if for a few generations only every 10th family would have only 1 child, GHG emissions would fall drastically. Having a kid basically more than doubles ‘your’ own carbon footprint.
Is this the only, the necessary, or the preferred way? Ofc not. Is it the biggest impact I can personally have on global warming? It is (voting, protesting, buying local & sustainable helps, but whatever you are doing the kids are doing it too).
It’s sad bcs there are so many ways we could solve this (at least achieve carbon neutrality, tho we need more than that now), but short-term profits of the current elite would suffer a little tiny bit so we can’t do it.
But additionally now we do need to prep to mitigate consequences and damage control (on top of green/ESG investments) … I wonder if all those profits will be used to finance this …
117.7 tonnes of Co2e per kid per parent per year in the USA (58.6 tonnes average when including all the poorer countries).Wynes et al. 2017
A conservative estimate is that we need to emit less than 2.1 tonnes in total per person per year to try to prevent catastrophic Anthropogenic climate change. Girod et al. 2013 (life expectancy/2050).
117.7 > 2.1
We need a fertility rate of about 0.01 for several decades.
Human overpopulation is not only the biggest contributor to push us into a climate-change tipping-points cascade, it’s also the root cause of almost all its other causes. It’s also the root cause of unsustainable habitat loss and pollution. It’s also the root cause of factory farming and industrial fishing, which causes more pain and suffering every year than all other atrocities ever committed combined.
As for corporations, they’re not burning the planet for shits and giggles - they’re psychopaths doing it because billions of people are choosing to buy their goods and services, which they want but don’t actually need.
This is why we have 2A in the US. Maybe we should start thinking about using it.
Every 2a person I’ve ever met who talks this way wants to shoot the wrong people.
It’s almost like maybe we shouldn’t rely on the lowest common denominator to resolve complex nuanced issues, huh?
You’ve never talked to a single socialist, anarchist, leftist, etc. about civilian firearm ownership before? It’s very commonly thought of as a necessary evil to prevent systemic oppression. Maybe don’t spend so much of your time talking to trumpers and neoconservatives?
To wit: there is no “right people” to want to shoot, and anyone who thinks there is probably has their own tribalism issue to work out. Community defense specifically does not have a target right up until the point someone else is an aggressor, and ends when violence is no longer needed. This is why you never saw “antifa burns down trump supporter’s house” or whatever in the news.
Oh yeah sorry I forgot to mention I’m in an area where redneck right wing stupidity abounds.
Yea fortunately im not a redneck. I totally understand how that line if thinking can make people uneasy. I think 2A is more useful in an “arm the workers” type of way
No, it’s not. It also solves nothing.
You sound unhinged.
Yeah man, that Thomas Jefferson guy was a real unhinged fuckwad.
that Thomas Jefferson guy was a real unhinged fuckwad
uhh, yeah? he fucked people he didn’t consider human, he’s at least unhinged as a dogfucker
Yeah, violence is the answer… 🤡
Why did you choose to have kids knowing what kind of future they would have? This is the reason I didn’t, and also to reduce my footprint in the world. I mean even 20 years ago, it was obvious nothing was going to change. So I don’t know why somebody would willingly have children these days.
Sometimes, in an intimate relationship, babies.
Cum in her mouth or ass or tits. Get a vasectomy.
Yeah right, like I’d give away my cum.
Conserve your vital essences
Every time, choice.
I don’t really like this narrative where we make people feel bad about having a kid. People are allowed to have kids.
deleted by creator
“We need to take drastic action to avoid causing our own extinction via climate change and leave a habitable world for future generations!”
People have kids so there will be a future generation
😠
and other people are allowed to react to it
The holier-than-thou attitude on Lemmy is arguably worse than reddit
someone disagreeing with you is not holier-than-thou
Well the guy acts surprised, like nobody has seen this coming for 50+ years and especially the last 20 years. Put some thought into having children before you do. If more people did, we wouldn’t be as deep in the shit as we are today. And people are allowed to criticise other poeple for having kids when they shouldn’t.
Hey, this is a fair sentiment. I took your tone initially as a judgmental one, but after rereading, I think I assumed too much. Thanks for the reply
No kids = no future
But, bringing kids into this mess is practically immoral.
The world has always been a mess. What’s your solution, wait until the world has solved every problem before anyone has kids? Humans would never have even evolved if that’s the plan.
Even nature is fucked.
I don’t have a solution. You don’t either. And those that can do anything about this shit, won’t, because it’d cost them some of their precious precious money hoard.
Climate change is basically teetering at the feedback loop point, if it’s not already there. Inflation is out of control. Corporate profits across the board are at an alltime high. Shit’s only going to keep getting worse from here.
Hope everyone enjoyed the coldest summer of the rest of their lives.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Extinction event goes vroom
I hope the corporation’s and governments are ok poor loves.
The environment is ok and all, but we need to think about the economy.
Since I read that this isn’t an existential threat I’m feeling much more at ease, much less open to catastrophic outcomes and the narrative that we should throw our hands in the air and give up.
.
What ever happen to the big ole hole in the ozone back in the 80s and 90s??..
Seems bad
Apocalypse, here we come!
Only 7 years early. Yay.
*7 years earlier than the recently revised predictions YAY.
Again, I’m not going to read that. It will just make me sad and angry a d nothing will change.
Politicians don’t give a shit, even of they’d understand what is going on, they’re mostly too dumb…
Things are going to get a LOT worse and nobody seems to understand that there is no quick fix here. “Yeah but CO2 scrubbers can…” no they cannot. Building those generates tonnes of CO2, then run ing them effectively generates CO2 as well. Think about it. Even if you put them on a solar grid (which too will initially cost CO2, not hugely important but just to keep in mind), the electricity that that grid generates to pull 100 tonnes of CO2 out of the air will NOT be available to other systems which will generate 150 tonnes of CO2 for their electricity.
Untill ALL electricity is solar, wind or nuclear, it literally is just throwing away energy. It’s actually more efficient to just connect those solar cells for your CO2 scrubbers to the electrical grid. You won’t pull 100 out, but now at least somewhere else won’t put in 150 into the system.
And even if they work. Do you have any idea how much CO2 we currently generate, and worse, how much we have generated that is in the atmosphere that we need to pull out for things to get better?
The current state of CO2 scrubbers is close to carrying water out of the ocean with buckets.
You wanna pull the extra CO2 out of the air? We’ve been adding extra on an industrial scale for near 2 centuries. RHAT amount of CO2 is what we need to pull out to get back to what it should be.
You always have losses with conversions, but taking that the earth has beeb pulling more CO2 you can more or less say that getting all the extra CO2 out of the atmosphere will take at least the same amount of energy that we’ve been generating with burning fossil fuels for the past 2 centuries. Think about it, were talking spending energy to pull air through a system, spending energy to filter the CO2, spending energy to store it, spending the same amount of energy we got from bur ing fuels to split the c from the O2 (same process in reverse), then spend energy to process and store all that carbon. Mayke Plastics out of it, maybe? Storing co2 is a problem as the amounts are astronomical. Where do youbstire cubic kilometers of CO2 , every year? If it escapes your back to square one.
Yes, that is a shit load of energy that we can’t produce all at once. For the next decades we’ll have to dedicate 25-50% of our energy output to cleanit the atmosphere, there is no way around that, there are no free lunches here.
Electrical cars are NOT the solution. For a small part, maybe, but mostly not. Electrical cars require roughly the same amiunt of energy as a gas car, that still needs to be generated. We need to use less energy. Wasting tonnes on energy on transporting 2 tonnes just to move a 70kgs person for a few kms is just insane. Use bikes. Walk. Use public transportation.
You wanna solve the climate change crisis?
- make sure all central electrical power generation is solar /wind /water /nuclear within 10 years. Until we are at that point, the rest doesn’t even matter.
1a) in parallel, start redesigning all our cities to become walkable. This doesn’t mean the conspiracy bullshit that American criminally lying politicians are saying, this means that stored and stuff we want is close by. Cities will be primarily for people, not cars. You can walk to stores because they’re close by. You can use bicycles to go everywhere we want. Public transportation can take care of the rest and with that we can get rid of 90+% of cars. Not because it’s forbidden, hit because we’ll designed cities don’t NEED cars.
-
There are loads of things that can’t go electrical, like airplanes. Reminds me: BUILD TRAINS. FFS America get your shit together and start building good railroads. Then you can get rid of half your airplane flights. Most flights are short enough that a high speed train is faster than flying anyway. The longer flights s yous still need cannot go electrical. You’ll need to build and run scrubbers spending the same amount of energy as those airplanes (and other systems that can’t go electrical) just to make sure their CO2 doesn’t add to the problem.
-
increase our energy capacity by a factor of two. We need to generate twice the amount of energy (all green) so that 50% can go to scrubbing our atmosphere for the next, say, century.
-
think about how to store all the captured CO2 or convert it to plastics or something.(double the energy required)
-
get ready to pay 2-3 times more for our energy. We’ve been the party generation who have enjoyed cheap energy from burning crap. The next 3-4 generations at least will be paying the bill, that is if they get to live to do so.
THIS IS IMPORTANT, I CANNOT CLARIFY THIS ENOUGH:
None of us will see this problem solved. Even if we actually seriously start working on fixing this shit today, we will be long dead and gone before this is done. THERE IS NO QUICK FIX. It took centuries to get here, it will take at least a century to get back where we started
Anyone claiming that this is easy to solve, sorry, is lying.
This is the biggest threat mankind has faced and people somehow just don’t give a shit and it is fucking depressing
Everything you said tracks except 5. Renewables are already cheaper than fossil fuels, and that’s with the subsidies for fossil fuels.
From a purely economic perspective fossil fuels don’t make sense anymore, they’re being kept around because fossil fuel companies are using immense amounts of money to fight against renewables.
People seem to forget renewable energy is essentially free. Sure there’s maintenance and upfront cost but that’s true for all energy generation. Fossil fuels simply can’t compete and it’s only going to get worse as we get better at collecting renewable energy.
No.
We’re going to be paying 2-3 times more because we need to create enormous amounts of extra energy to clean the atmosphere.
That, and renewable energy isn’t free either. Solar panels require regular replacement as they (still) degrade quite a bit (too much) over time. If I’m not mistaken, they still require replacement every 10 or so years.
Windmills require regular maintenance. The power grid requires maintenance.
Wind and solar requires enormous batteries that degree and require regukar replacements.
Renewables are only so so renewable, don’t expect to pay anything less for the same amount of energy. Then now we will have to generate these enormous amounts of extra energy to take the CO2 out, who is going to pay for that? We all are.
So yeah, do expect to pay 2-3 times more for energy when this all starts, ideally tomorrow but likely 20 years from now as we’re still not done partying.
I already mentioned maintenance.
You people act like coal plants don’t have teams of maintenance engineers onsite 24/7.
I’m not acting like anything. I am fully aware of the requirements of fossil fuels. I’m mentioning all the requirements for “renewables” because there people typically act as if there are zero costs (and pollution and maintenance) related with it.
I’m not pro fossil fuels, not at all. Don’t get me wrong. I’m simply saying that were Ina SERIOUSLY fucked situation that simply won’t be solved within our generation, if ever at all. We’re at a cliff and a small group just keeps partying while shuffling closer and the rest of the world gleefully shuffles right after them. A few renewables are not going to fix this
Price doesn’t matter if it’s cloudy like most winters with barely any sun and the wind is not blowing. Solar also won’t work at night and energy storage is crap, batteries are very much not renewable. Of course there is reversible hydro plants but these can’t be used everywhere and are a disaster for local ecosystems.
Everyone is acting like renewables will fix everything… They won’t. The only thing that can replace fossil fuels right now is nuclear, which is also not renewable, but at least we have plenty of fuel for it.
Thermal hydro has pretty much solved the storage problem and solar works fine during the winter.
if we were to replace current fossil plants with nuclear, the fuel runs out in 70-100. years and will get much more expensive. Think about paying ten times your electricity bill in 20 years.
It is possible to run a 100% renewable grid, using technology like hydrogen or other chemical storage system.
Solar wont have the output in winter. Nuclear plants will have to shut down in summer, because the water supply will get unstable. France nuclear heavy energy production could collapse within the next two decades if the current trend of lower river water continues. And there is no reason to believe otherwise.
But the biggest issue is that the grid is thought the wrong way around. Currently the supply is adjusted to the demand. But for many applications the demand can be adjusted to the supply. On the household level that means your fridge and washing machine to run, when there is a lot of energy available. On the industrial level that means to automate productions and adjust their intensity to available energy.
Not all nuclear plants are the same. Some can use nuclear waste as fuel. Others are small and modular which allows them be turned on and off as needed and also be deployed easier and cheaper. We need solutions sooner, rather than later. Nuclear tech is here now, storage for renewables still needs more time to refine and streamline.
nuclear plants take decades to project and build. And the modular and reusing waste plants are still in the concept stage
Modular reactors have been equiped to submarines for decades, they passed the concept stage long ago.
There are many kinds of nuclear reactors, but not much was invested into them to bring the cost down.
I am not saying that nuclear is perfect. Unless we figure out fusion it won’t be a long term solution. It’s just what we need right now to get rid of fossil fuels while we figure out the large scale renewable grids with good storage tech.
Hydrogen is a good option, if only EV manufacturers focused more on that… Charging the EV would be a matter of minutes not hours and there wouldn’t be issues with colder climates like the current batteries have.
Hydrogen doesn’t work and nuclear is too expensive CCS also doesn’t work.
Renewables work and are cheap and easy to install. Combine them with battery in a SunWindBattery system and maybe a bit of hydro and we have enough energy.
There are so many solutions.
But instead we are using gas and burning oil. Politicians and fossil fuel companies obstruct renewables and other climate mitigation
Because profit is more important than human survival.
We had a good run. Good luck to the next species to dominate the earth. May you avoid religious dogma, find an economic system that respects your natural environment, and a political system that respects the right to live a clean and healthy world.
Realistically, extinction would be sweet relief compared to what is actually in store for humans with climate change. More likely that we hang around in smaller communities and death / suffering is even more widespread.
I mean realistically it’s all going to hell sooner or later. You’ll start with millions of climate refugees, closed borders, violence. Then climate wars (a wall with machine guns isn’t going to stop people who have no other way to survive). And if a country with nukes (like India) finds itself uninhabitable then things are really going south. Next up you have a possible nuclear war and the end of humanity as we know it.
Sure, a small amount of humans might survive, but civilization will go down in chaos. Even areas that are inhabitable and have plenty of water will break down, because the local infrastructure can’t support hundreds of thousands of refugees forcing their way in.
You’ll start with millions of climate refugees
Millions? If only.
I’ve seen estimates which say at least a billion by 2050:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/06/climate-refugees-the-world-s-forgotten-victims/)
Oh, I was more thinking per area. Not all refugees will go to the same place.
It will start with millions and that might already be enough to cause collapse. When it’s over a billion it’s already over.
The whole Syria thing already caused us lots of issues in Europe. Arguably the civil war was caused in part by climate change exacerbating a drought. The surge in refugees helped the far right and populists across Europe and was a factor in brexit.
I can only imagine what’ll happen if it gets worse. Children of Men is likely to be eerily prophetic.
I’ve seen estimates that say a billion dead by 2100 is the most optimistic possible outcome. Even the notoriously cautious IPCC is making the most unimaginably dire predictions:
In its report focusing on the impacts of global warming on people and the planet, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says that every inhabited continent is already experiencing multiple climate impacts, from droughts and flooding to biodiversity loss and falling food production. Between 3.3 to 3.6 billion people live in areas “highly vulnerable to climate change,” the authors warn, with “additional severe risks” should the Earth warm beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). (From an article in Forbes magazine.)
Food and water wars.
We had a good run.
Did we, though?
We created a lot of value for the shareholders.
@Gsicht @Sterile_Technique And “pragmatic” solutions to the climate crisis. Oh wait …!
“pragmatic” solutions to the climate crisis.
Compost the rich?
I call dibs on driving the thresher!
Cool thing about Lemmy - you can past images directly from your clipboard!
i know, but i kind of thought that the linked references below the image were interesting too
I mean, we left the planet. We created art. We did some good, and life will diversify again after we’re gone.
we did just waste a good few million years of evolution though (let’s say 65 million accounting for the rise of mammals). earth isn’t going to be habitable forever, from memory there’s less than a billion years left before the temp would increase with the expanding sun enough to make liquid water impossible. feels like we kind of shot earth in the foot a bit here
65 million years isn’t that bad on a geologic scale
As long as there isn’t a runaway greenhouse effect that turns Earth to Venus, life would almost certainly continue, with or without us.
and life will diversify again after we’re gone.
Here’s hoping; but that’s far from a safe assumption. The kicker about the changes we’re making to this planet is that a lot of them are positive feedback loops, so even if 100% of humans just got thanos-snapped out of existence RIGHT NOW, meaning a complete stop on fossil fuel consumption, deforestation, etc; the damage we’ve already caused will continue to get worse on its own with no further input from us.
So how far can those feedback loops go until they’re broken naturally? They might stabilize; they might just carry on until this planet is molten.
There will for sure be life after the last human dies, but given a few thousand more years, even the most resilient of critters could still be fucked because of us.
it seems pretty likely that microprocessors will survive us, and give a BIG jump start to any species that follows. literacy seems to be a longer shot, but still a possible stepping stone for some other organism to take over our work. my money is on fungi to figure out microprocessors. if not them, then plants, especially “weeds”. finally, ocean mammals might be able to work some of the junk we’ve made and cargo-cult themselves into the information age.
i really am hopeful for life on earth to survive the death of Sol.
they might just carry on until this planet is molten
The odds of true runaway warming are very low, the planet has both been much hotter and had much higher CO2 levels in the past. The Holocene is actually a cool period, geologically.
We’re just going to make it too hot to grow enough crops to feed the world.
deleted by creator
The lake Toba Eruption caused a 4°C drop in global temperatures, covered asia in inches to feet of ash, and may have taken the climate 1000s of years to recover.
Even more extreme, the lava floods that created the Siberian Traps 250 million years ago raised ocean temps to 40°C, killed off 90% of all life, and might have taken millions of years to recover.
We are tiny. The climate and the Earth are formidable. Sure, we might have the capacity to destroy all multicellular life on earth, but she’s recovered from even worse.
We shouldn’t ever give up, but I think the earth is capable of handling even our worst fuck-ups.
Did you do any of these things yourself?
Is there any reason you would think me not producing art means that humans haven’t?
Maybe he’s a master in ASCII art, what do you know
Depends on how you quantify it. We sure did make a lot of money, or at least the winners did.
There were a couple of hundred thousand years of humans managing not to fuck up the entire planet, before the two centuries of doing so for the sake of money.
There were periods in which we were nicer to the planet, but we’ve always been pretty horrible to each other. Even at the stage of civilization we’re at now - with all the advancements and comforts etc - we’re still going to war with each other just for the hell of it; murdering each other over shit like skin color or what we find sexually attractive; not only profiteering off the suffering of others, but actively manufacturing suffering to profiteer off.
We really are horrible.
We also managed to kill off almost all the large animals thousands of years ago, come to think of it.
Mosquitos are like “that species was delicious. I wonder what the next one will taste like”
we probably taste like shit… they sit around the campfire and remember the good old days of fresh, free range Dino blood as far as the proboscis could poke… not this Walmart meat they get now…
I dunno, they seem fucking determined to get as much of my blood as possible, little fuckers.
Are you a free range dinosaur perhaps?
I wonder if primates are incapable of building a global economic system that doesn’t end in disaster
Their current attempt says no.
I live in one of the blue spots. It’s not that I don’t believe this, but we have been cooler than average.
Which is exactly what you’d expect given what the blue represents? Does that mean you ignore the rest of the planet? Do you understand that we’re talking about the temperature of the entire earth, right?
Is there anything i could/can do to make a difference?
Google the weather underground
There are no peaceful ways to make a difference. Change my mind.
Depends on your definition of peaceful. Industrial sabotage that specifically targets unmanned equipment would still be peaceful by my definition, for example.
Shall i give fatwa for Green Jihad?
You seem like more of a mauve hajji, if I’m being honest. You’re definitely a fall.
See if that rpg comes in teal and ooh girl
chefs kiss
If we all stop breathing at the same time…
As others have said, voting is important. But also I’d guess that direct action will play a large role in the next few decades.
the next few decades
An optimist, I see!
We are a hardy bunch. But things are going to get very ugly.
Honestly, I’m pretty sure the deficit we could create on an individual basis will just be used by companies instead, so I’m just gonna agree with the others on voting being the most effective method of making a difference.
Some changes people (in the US or elsewhere) might want to check into:
- See if your local electric utility has Green Power programs where you can elect to have your power come from renewables (via credits) for 2-5% of your bill/month extra
- If you own a home, consider making switches to more electrified stuff like: induction cookstoves v. natural gas, heat pumps v. AC units, power tools that have batteries and/or cables v. gasoline or diesel, adding solar panels to your roof or property (only costs ~$20k these days), etc.
- Start moving your pensions or stocks into greener index funds, or even consider adopting banks and credit unions that publicly disclose which projects and companies they invest your dollar in
- Consider buying your groceries from local farmer’s markets or farms that have mail-to-your-door programs (aka CSAs or Community Supported Agriculture programs); this is a good resource to learn more about the farms near you
- Switch to non-red meat diets, and then after that switch to a vegetarian diet, and then after that switch to a vegan diet (all while consulting health professionals); this is a good resource on vegan diets if anyone is curious
- Consider choosing a Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV; 100% electric) or a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV; 50/50 electric/gas) as your new car; this resource can steer you in the right direction
- Vote in primary elections where candidates prioritize climate action, then vote for them again in general elections when the time comes; this is a good resource to stay up on current civic events
- Buy clothing/shoes used, or if you need to buy new, look for the GOTS and OEKO-TEX labels to make sure what you’re buying is organic, is ethical, and doesn’t pollute local environments of where your clothes/shoes are made
Don’t procreate. Or if you do just yeet the baby into a furnace to skip a few steps, same outcome really.
Apart from the voting which is above all else, if you REALLY want to do something on an individual basis, you should reduce your meat or become a vegetarian. It seems that’s what experts claim has the biggest impact. Apart from that, don’t have children, or 2 at most.
reduce your meat or become a vegetarian
i’m dubious about this. don’t get me wrong: i try to make sure at least half my calories come from soylent. i’m saying i have looked at the methodology, and it doesn’t seem sound. HAVING READ THE RELEVANT STUDIES it’s not clear to me that the researchers are even drawing correct conclusions.
here’s an example that i think can be extrapolated across many data points: cotton seed. first, cotton is grown for textiles. like, exclusively. like, the only reason to grow cotton is for textiles. BUT you can increase the profits from your cotton harvest if you sell the seed to cattle operations. so cattle are fed cottonseed. then the water and land-use costs of cotton get rolled into the costs of raising cattle. but that’s nonsensical. cottonseed is purely waste product, and giving it to cattle CONSERVES resources.
soybeans are another thing altogether, and the complexity of the whole agricultural system implies, to me at least, that maybe it’s not so simple as “reduce your meat intake”.
I must admit it’'s not super intuitive to me either, but it seems the consensus is pretty strong among experts, and I haven’t taken the time to really delve in deep on the issue.
But apparently a significant part of the problem is that cows make a lot of methane, that is a very bad greenhouse gas, and when it breaks down it’s to CO2 which is still a greenhouse gas. So kind of a bad double dip as I understand it.
If we don’t have children because we care for our planet, we leave the world to those who don’t care at all. Not sure if this is the right decision.
adoption
sounds like you’re advocating for BOTH eugenics AND brainwashing. please reconsider.
Yes, adoption is literally eugenics AND brainwashing, you are very smart.
who are you saying shouldn’t have children? whose children are you proposing to teach to care for the planet?
I never said anyone shouldn’t have children.
whose children are you proposing to teach to care for the planet?
children up for adoption
Honestly, I haven’t thought of it like that. I guess that’s a decent point. But having more than 2 children, and you are part of the problem.
My family had one kid. So we went from I believe seven grandparents and great aunts and uncles down to one child just within two generations!
At this rate my family could depopulate the whole planet in no time.
Also a friend of mine just told me that he met a lady who had 22 siblings so…
Same with atheism, religious people have more children, so the religious population is increasing, despite people deconverting.
Please don’t have children. Think about the life you’re condemning them to.
this message brought to you by eugenicists against english literacy. english literacy: if it didn’t make you sterile, it should have.
this is sadly where my head is at.
Yup, my wife and I both want kids.
We’re now pretty set on adoption.
Adoption is great!
There are other things you can do individually as well, like try using the car and AC less, and generally live more frugally.
But remember that 100 companies make up 71% of all human made carbon emissions. It’s good to act locally, but we need global action to stop these companies and their supporters, that means voting for competent government.
The bulk of those companies are in the energy business and they respond to consumer demand. Chevron isn’t out there drilling, extracting, refining, and burning oil for no reason.
They will respond faster to heavy regulations/taxation, national policy shifts towards renewable energies, fossil fuel bans and nationalisation/forced liquidation.
No individual is their primary customer, and doesn’t have the negotiating power to affect them, they are effectively Mega corps, and immune even to certain national laws.
Vote for a government that will affect them, the other meaningful option (for individuals) is sabotage/Eco-terrorism, which isn’t really a long-term solution.
they respond to consumer demand.
they DICTATE consumer options.
When the parties on offer are various flavours of neoliberalism, as in most capitalist countries these days, it doesn’t give you any options that will make a difference quick enough. They simply can’t do what needs to be done within that economic framework.
That said, vote for the least worst one. But the most significant things have to be done outside of that electoral framework, because it can’t resist the demands of short-term profit.
Why vegetarian, not vegan? Cows are a major contributor to the emissions, and people tend to increase their dairy consumption when going vegetarian.
One step at a time.
Going vegetarian doesn’t seem to be the most impactful when you look at the numbers, as per this video. Vegan diets still have the lowest GHG footprint and GWP of all diets.
That being said, I went vegetarian first before going vegan. So your point is entirely valid.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/y9R6yJj5RO0?si=-bqRIP1zQKv0m5lG
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Honestly I wasn’t aware the difference is that big. I thought cows were bad mostly for the meat, but apparently milk is at least as bad. 🤥
That sucks. ☹️
If you want to see what the heck veganism is about compared to vegetarianism, check this resource out.
But yeah! Leather is also bad for the same reason, contributing to the same industry. There are alternatives out there so don’t feel bad!
One step at a time, like you’ve mentioned in your other comments.
Vote!
This, it’s the only thing that really counts, we all need to pull together, the only way to do that, is to vote in politicians that actually give a shit.
Do any really, though?
Oh boy not the false equivalence again. If you don’t give a shit yourself then don’t vote.
It makes a difference who gets the power, and your main influence is your power to vote.
I always do vote for the party with most proactive views on climate change.
I just feel really jaded that they are going to make much of a difference, short term capitalistic gains seem more important to all
Edit - I’m also beginning to feel that voting isn’t my most powerful move. Disruptive protests are looking better and better.
You’re right, voting isn’t the most powerful thing you can do.
It’s getting involved in politics altogether, getting more people to vote.
And not “We got the president and maybe a senator” vote. The crowd that’s fighting climate change every step of the way has infested all the way down to the local levels making it harder to vote on the national platforms. I’d say this is a US thing, but if there’s voting, they seem to be infesting all of it.
It may not be the most powerful for all, but for most it is.
Just don’t go along with something like Just Stop Oil, that’s not constructive or helpful in any way, and it’s off-putting for the vast majority tiring people of the issue, rather than waking their interest.
Voting is the absolute smallest political action anyone could ever take. Protest always has been and always will be more effective at moving the needle. Above all else these ghouls want to preserve capitalism. If it looks like the only way they preserve capitalism in the near term is capitulating to the demands of environmentalists then that is what will happen. Of course in the long term capitalists will attempt to erode these gains just like they have done with social safety nets in various countries for largely the same reasons (increased rate of profit).
Yes, some that really give a shit might not be a part of a major party in whatever country you live in, but even among established parties there are people who are more inclined to do something about the climate catastrophe than others.
deleted by creator
This is the best summary I could come up with:
This year is now almost certain to become Earth’s warmest on record after a hot July and August saw global temperatures reach the Paris Agreement target of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels for the first time.
Data released last week from Copernicus, a branch of the European Union Space Programme, shows August was 1.59C warmer than 1850–1900 levels, following a 1.6C increase in July.
This upward swing should ensure 2023 becomes the new warmest year on record, an assessment shared by the Bureau of Meteorology’s Senior Climatologist Blair Trewin.
“If current 2023 temperature anomalies are maintained, or increase, over the last four months of the year that would be sufficient for an annual record to be set,” he said.
Major global climatological records have fallen at a rapid rate across the Earth’s atmosphere, hydrosphere and cryosphere, including:
“A large part of it is the removal of the cooling influence of La Niña which has been suppressing global temperatures over the last two to three years,” Mr Trewin said.
The original article contains 531 words, the summary contains 167 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Climate change must be stopped by any means necessary. Start doing what must be done. You know what that means.
removed by mod
Such a counterproductive useless attitude. Not trying to be mean, but rhetoric like this is what spurs inaction.
removed by mod
Careful, gonna cut yourself on all that edge dickhead.
Eat the rich.
It’s not enough. We (rich and not so rich) must either consume less, or be less people.
The first route involves changing technologies AND habits. And I’m not talking about recyclable bags or save water at home.
You change habits by making it more expensive to do unsustainable shit. Very few states here in the US are willing to properly tax carbon emissions. Very few Americans are willing to remove the subsidies that the beef industry enjoys which would see steak at $35/lb.
Just saying “consume less” does very little. People respond to incentives. Peoples’ wallets are big incentives.
On the other hand, this problem is global. We all need to work together in order to succeed. That’s the hardest part.
What does that mean? I’m a little slow over here, but happy to help.
Economic sabotage and guerrilla warfare if necessary
Big words, why don’t you go ahead and show us how it’s done then? Or are you just going to chest pound from behind your monitor?
Hello fbi
Recycle harder?
Consume local!
Bring back ice from Mars
I think he means vote or die.
Or eat the rich
That would not fight climate change at all.
Says the rich.
Killing rich people doesn’t stop people from driving cars or eating livestock or flying on airplanes or trading on sea lanes or requiring heat for their homes/water/etc or needing electricity
That’s a meme my dude, literally from the first album I ever bought from Aerosmith…
I mean if we lived in a society where we could tax billionaires out of existence, then we could probably solve climate change with all that tax revenue.
Maybe in a different playthrough, kid.
It would significantly lower emissions given that the rich produce a hell of a lot more emissions than the average person.
They objectively do not because no percent of people are rich.
Way ahead of ya burp
Om nom nom
I HAVE ALL THE PAPER STAWS* IM DOING MY BEST!!! *now with more cancer microplastics!
