Great but I already do as much as I personally can handle. Would be great if society at large, e.g. laws, regulations, and big corps, could get on the same level.
Me: dusts off hands Installed solar on the roof, bicycling to work, updated the insulation on all my windows, and drastically reduced the amount of plastic in my life.
Tech Company Next Door: CONSUMES 70 MwH OF POWER FOR TWO YEARS STRAIGHT POWERING AN UNOPTIMIZED AI
Me: Begins flipping through a copy of How To Blow Up A Pipeline
eh, I don't think that's gonna make much of a difference:
most of the cost is probably lost revenue from the stopped flow, not the pump itself!
that said you're almost at the ideal target already!
it's best to sabotage the nexus point nearest the pipeline source: that way you knock out the largest part of the network resulting in the most damage by disabling most of the network!
tl;dr: knock out infrastructure as close to the source as possible, that isn't actually the source!
(because sabotaging the source is a really, really bad idea, see: every oil spill ever)
(and for fucks sake, don't do any of this in winter...people might freeze, if there's no time to come up with alternative energy sources...which is why late spring is the best time to blow up a pipeline! :D )
"guarded" is usually a fence and some cameras, maybe a locked door. Honestly an easier target than any buried pipeline. Kind of surprising we don't see more ELF action on this front, except for the whole 'get sent to jail forever to make an example of you' thing.
I agree, many of us have maxed out passive improvements. Now let's work on active.
Call your local oil company CEO. Get a job at Exxon and really half ass it. Visit your town government and demand better public transport and electric busses. Take a dump on the nearest gas pump.
Only some of those are jokes and I'm not sure which.
There’s a clear difference between being in big trouble and being completely screwed. If we can avoid the extinction of humanity and go with catastrophic disasters and famine that eradicates vast majority of the population, we should totally do it.
Ideally, we would avoid all that, and go back to the good old days. Every small step towards that goal is worth it, although taking longer steps is highly encouraged.
Is climate change an extinction level threat? I've never heard that.
I read somewhere before that the release of methane from the melting ice caps (?) could create a knock on effect of global warming turning the Earth into another Venus
How much of that is actually true I never looked further into.
The planet has previously been 15C above current levels due to flood volcanism so earth turning into a Venus just straight up isn't happening. It is potentially mechanically possible but we're talking conditions so extreme that we couldn't make it happen even if we wanted too with our current level of technology.
Actually, level of warming that could directly wipe humanity is technically possible, even the hopium dealers among climate scientists admit that (notably Michael E. Mann). But even if it doesn't kill all of us directly, it will likely generate a domino effect for other existential threats.
This is highly speculative, because climate science is fiendishly complex, and the error bars in these estimates are as wide as the solar system. However, there is a concept called the “runaway greenhouse effect”, in which the global average temperature spirals out of control, roasting the entire plant. Not exactly the kind of concept you want to think about too much.
::: spoiler NOT Uplifting
I strongly believe that there's a regression of global society that will prevent humanity from surviving the next k/t level impact. I weakly believe that the climate catastrophe that we are headed toward currently will cause such a regression. I weakly believe that if we don't take global action in the next 4-5 years, we will be unable to avoid a catastrophe of that scale.
I don't think the current global leadership can be convinced through lobbying. Non-violent opportunities to replace the global leadership are dwindling. When/if only violent means remain, I will simply enjoy what wealth I have until I am extinguished by the Glorious Revolution as the Bourgeoisie scum I will have become.
Then do us all a favour and remove yourself, if you're going to go full nihilist and hopelessness. If all you are willing to do is be inactive and continue to consume then we'd rather not have you around doing nothing but contributing to the problem.
OR
Join the rest of us and DO SOMETHING! Fight for something you want, do you remember that feeling? Have you ever known it or have you always been this pathetic? And if you truly believe that there is no hope then why not end it all by taking out some of these polluting fuckers with you?! Don't get depressed, get radicalised!!!
No offense, but this is exactly the kind of active pessimism that this post is trying to combat. The only mindset that creates positive change is active optimism. In other words, hope for better and taking action to try and get there.
Note that this is not to be confused with inactive optimism. "Everything will just work out on its own". That also doesn't work.
Active pessimism is the most damaging mindset, though, because it actively drains others of their will to make things better. Feeling hopeless is real and understandable, I've been feeling it, too. Spreading it around and shutting down those who are trying to do better isn't the way to process it, though.
We shoudn't rely on carbon capture, the technology is still at an embryonary stage and will not be ready on time to have a significant impact. Nor on a nuclear winter, for obvious reasons.
And that single release, equivalent to two years of human output, is the tip of the spear.
Hope police want to argue that if we are calm about things and don't point out the dire situation we're in, we'll somehow manage.
It's the same argument as telling a passenger in a car driving towards a cliff at 50 mph, close enough that seconds matter, to not yell 'CLIFF! BRAKE!' Because it would demoralize the driver, and should instead calmly inform the driver that we might have some problems if they don't stop applying pressure to the gas.
Okay. But every minute we can delay reaching that threshold will be worth it.
To me it's the same as the US democracy right now. Yes it's far too late to see no ill effects and we are already facing the consequences, but every act of resistance to unlawful, immoral and unconstitutional orders slow them down, and with enough co-ordination may slow them down enough before Trump and the oligarchs become truly unstoppable.
For any issue that effects our world's existence, stand boldly and take action. Don't let the fear of the inevitability of it consume you.
In fact, they are already unstoppable. History showed us many times that when autocrats are in full power, they keep it forever, unless they lose a war or die without having planified their succession. And don't talk me about the Biden example, his presidency did not prevented an unpreceded harm by the GOP.
It's precisely this mentality I'm arguing against (the unstoppableness of Trump, that's what he wants you to think).
People only have power over you, if you obey their command. MAGA obeys Trump, that's why Trump has power over MAGA. Whether he has power over the rest of America depends on how much Americans want to defend it from his ongoing attacks, which are happening right now and will continue. "Right now" means that it's not too late. Giving up and conceding means giving Trump a free pass to wreck the USA.
Your statement is extremely naive, because when a politician establish a rule, you are legally forced to follow it, and believe me, the authorities don't care about the means to enforce the said rules if they don't want to follow them. Resistance to Trump will lead to increased repression, you should not forget he is a known authoritarian. If you want to risk your freedom -if not your physical integrity- to set yourself above the law, good for you, but don't incite people to do so.
It'll at least determine how many species survive. And the threshold to total human extinction is very high, so every ton of co2 is part of a life saved.
I was going to argue that you only need wait for the US to surpass the UK in silencing dissent, but then you said civilized.. I’m not so sure that the US can compete based on that metric anymore.
I don't believe in the possibility of mass civil disobediance, especially in a context where most of people are either depolitized, either are voting massively for (wannabe) autocrats.
I feel like in a way, it is too late. The human race decided it doesn't care to fight climate change. There is going to be significant disruptions, especially near the equator. But on the other hand, even if we overshoot our climate targets, there is always a chance for us to reverse the damage dealt using technology and by reclamation of ecosystems that have been destroyed. I think as long as our species survives we can fix things. But we need a massive, massive change in attitude to muster the political will to do something.
Kind of feels like in 20-30 years time we'll be claiming its worth fighting for a climate that doesn't immediately kill us if we go outside for 20 minutes instead of 15.
Or to put it another way, do these scientists not see there's a difference between living and surviving?
God forbid someone tries to think past the next quarter.
If the future can't be livable and people just wants a quiet suicide for the human race I've got good news. There's a very easy solution for avoiding that discomfort that also happens to be the #1 way to reduce your carbon footprint.
But if you want to keep living and not just surviving, suck it up...
The post is right, but only on the paper, and not really in a world that is progressively taken over by ecocidal autocrats whose program is to kill every bit of efforts in climate fight, so even the smallest progress we made will soon be distant memories and fighting will be increasingly dangerous and difficult and, ultimately, virtually impossible. And the locked-in catastrophes are now sufficient to collapse our already fragilized geopolitical context.
People saying it's "not too late" are systematically downplaying the current political context, wich make their message pretty unconsistent.
Yes, until the political situation make it unfeasible without being treated like a dangerous terrorist. The OP didn't said it either, but she should have.
If anything the current political context makes what needs to be done pretty clear. There's a difference between downplaying the problem and realizing that if laying down and dieing isn't an option.
A bit sad how pessimistic everyone is. Renewables are currently becoming the most economic way to produce electricity and even states that do not care about the environment are investing in it. EVs are making progress as well. And while it is true that a lot of damage has already been done and we will face the consequences, I also feel that decarbonization is inevitable even from a economic perspective at this point.
The speed at which this happens is variable though and determines how many people will die, this is why it is important to not be pessimistic and hopeless but to try steering things in the right direction.
Americans are pessimistic because we don't have a functional democracy and our fascist oligarchs are too stupid to use their resources to fight climate change.... And the rest of the world is pessimistic because the world's most powerful economy and military has fallen to fascist oligarchy.
Nothing will change until we abolish the billionaires and replace our two party system with a modern multiparty parliamentary system with proportional representation
USAmericans have a religious attachment to fossil fuels that I can't understand. "Drill baby drill" isn't even economically viable and yet has become a call to prayer for many US politicians.
Who is voting for them and why do they win elections if there isn't a substantial of people who support the idea? "Drill baby drill" isn't a secret, it is what Republicans have been running on for over a decade.
Many USAmericans are pessimistic because we were finally taking a medium sized step in the right direction, and somehow half the country thinks that’s a bad thing
Personally, the "renewable" energies aren't making me hopeful. Because they are absolutly not renewable, they can't be build without pollution because of the materials you need.
And even so, climate change is not even the worst of our existential threats, there are many more, but strangely, people are only talking about climate.
Soil depletion, (micro)plastics in the water, biodiversity collapse, political instability, economical crisis, nuclear menace that is not a thing of the past anymore, sanitary crisis that will likely be worse than COVID, to name a few.
OPEC members have excess capacity. Saudi Arabia for example can produce an additional 3 million barrels per day without having to do anything or spend anything. So no, your assessment is wrong.
That's because billionaires like Robert Murdock own all our media and they use their power to push disinformation to undermine class solidarity and democracy.
If we want to save the world then we have to get rid of the billionaires asap as they are the greatest threat to democracy.
A fair concern. It's no peer reviewed research article that's for sure, but it was somewhat news to me and may be to others who likewise did not know and/or needed to hear it.
"News" here meaning from an authoritative source (though I did not confirm that this person even so much as exists, much less is actually a climate scientist) and bringing information that is not trivially already known to the audience.
A lot of the "news" focuses on the tipping point (to be able to reverse the effects of climate change), thus leaving a gap between that vs. what we are now desiring more to know: just how fucked are we all?
But if it needs to be removed, that's okay with me - I don't want to mess up the community's implementation of the rules.
I don't know if it's really selfish more people are a part of a system that is bigger than them that forces them into situations that have a negative impact on CO2 levels
Working a job that has low pay which probably force people to housing that is further from their work place, in America most cities don't have a great public transportation infrastructure nor do they have alternative commuting options like protected bike lanes. This forces people to have to drive more.
The Return to Office bullshit has forced more cars on the road that were not there 4 years ago which is impacting CO2 levels
These are just 2 of many different things that the system has created that have put people in situations that make slowing CO2 levels more difficult.
Yeah I mean...we are all born into an already existing system. I guess we could all kill ourselves to help the planet, but that's not really a great option for the self. I don't have the power to change my country's infrastructure as a singular being.
I guess we could all kill ourselves to help the planet
There's a scene in the show Utopia where one of the antagonists is talking to a woman with her child at the bus station. She says they could drive but it's better for the planet if she takes the bus.
He says if she wants to save the planet she should kill her kid, because raising a child in a first world nation is one of the most carbon-intense things you can do if you can't afford a private jet.
Would that even matter? As in e.g. the timing and speed - like those still alive would keep going for quite awhile, perhaps all the more so given increasing technology, especially if the effects of aging were to be if not eliminated entirely then pushed back even a little bit more, or cancer, etc.
And yet all that pales in comparison to a CEO taking a private jet to work hundreds of miles every day.
And all that pales in comparison to the amount of CO2 released by the cargo ships and planes going all around the world every day to support our global economy.
Not trying to absolve the average Joe of their responsibility towards the environment, but like, there's only so much actually in our control. And even if every single one of us 99%ers did everything in our power correctly, unless we see huge global systematic changes at the policy level (like we did with the ozone layer), it probably won't be enough.
And all that pales in comparison to the amount of CO2 released by the cargo ships and planes going all around the world every day to support our global economy.
Yeah, and who's fueling said global economy? Regular people browsing Shein ordering ridiculous amounts of plastic-wrapped shit priced at ridiculously low levels.
Carbon tax is the only solution because it would affect both the rich and the poor. Yeah sure a rich CEO wouldn't feel a simple 2 or 3 fold cost increase to their jet-setting, but if at the same time their company makes a lot less money because people ain't buying their pointless shit now that carbon is taxed and things are expensive? That CEO might just start flying less too. And we'd need way fewer cargo ships operating if people bought fewer goods. Oh and manufacturing might become more decentralized again once carbon tax from transportation is an actual cost to consider.
Thing is, nobody is going to want a carbon tax. We'd all have to be inconvenienced for that. We all take so much shit for granted. So we're all fucked.
Yeah, and who's fueling said global economy? Regular people browsing Shein ordering ridiculous amounts of plastic-wrapped shit priced at ridiculously low levels.
Sure, yes, average people play their part in the global economy. But I think the infinite growth mentality is a big part of it too, which again, falls solely on the CEOs.
Ultimately I do agree with your overall assessment, things do feel kinda hopeless right now, because it just doesn't seem like very many people in a position to make a difference are really doing anything.
Seriously, if there's one thing I don't miss from reddit (I tell a lie, there's dozens of things I don't miss from Reddit) it's the "Actually we're too far gone, and everyone's going to die in seven days because none of you jokers will buy a Tesla!~" nonsense
Funfact: Conspiracy Bullshit in the other direction is still Conspiracy Bullshit
Really? I knew it had gotten bad over there since the Rexodus but wow, it sounds rough. I'm so glad we are over here in The Good Place instead. Wait a minute...!? 🤡
I was going to present a partial rebuttal invoking politics but then I saw that this is [email protected].
Another positive is that we humans are highly adaptive. We’re already making a lot of changes towards renewables and improving the efficiency and reliability of our electric grids and other large infrastructure. Climate change definitely brings a ton of challenges with it (and some of the changes have already taken place) but I think it also gives us new opportunities such as longer growing seasons up North.
She is right, but the thing thats missing is that this isnt co2 you will keep in a container in your garage. So if I dont use a petrol car, this doesnt remove the petrol. It just means someone else will burn it.
Unless there is supply-side constraints or CO2 capture this has 0 effect
Whether or not people survive is going to depend a lot on luck, unfortunately. People in low-lying third world countries are gonna be in the tightest spot.
i saw a video on youtube, by someone named sabine said everyone gave up on climate action, yea they gave up like years ago, the only miracle was when lockdown happened, and global co2 fell very fast and nature quickly reclaimed certain areas. like they pretended to care, but never did anything to stop it. even in research i heard that you cant frame climate change was leaning towards caused by "people" or your research wont get funded, thats how bad funding grant sis for research for some universities.
She posted a nuanced video about hormones and surgery on trans-identified minors, that considered both sides of the issue. If you find that "absolute horseshit" then you are not interested in science but in religion.
It's never too late if you seriously consider all your options Ie:
Full nuclear energy development with SMRs
Fusion reactors research
Full transition to electric/hydrogen vehicles
Economic sanctions to countries with grid power coming from carbon/ non renewable resources above a certain percentage
Full development of lunar/cis lunar infrastructure/space
Large scale deployment of solar mirror arrays designed to reflect incoming sunlight, built using lunar regolith as raw materials source
Blowing an 88 megatons hydrogen bomb under the sea, below 8 to 12 Km under the ocean floor surface to trigger about 30 years of carbon capture in a second
The US is fucked anyway, but if China and the EU worked together, greatness could be approved on potentially the most important front:
Economic sanctions to countries with grid power coming from carbon/ non renewable resources above a certain percentage
However, the one I'm most curious about is the following:
Blowing an 88 megatons hydrogen bomb under the sea, below 8 to 12 Km under the ocean floor surface to trigger about 30 years of carbon capture in a second
How would this work? I'm really interested in the mechanics of this, not so much the feasibility (which is non-existent anyway)
I'm a pessimist in that even in the best possible situation humans would still find a way to overpopulate the earth until no solution is viable. We are parasites
Indeed, read the Exxon-Mobil report from the late 1970's and early 80's. They hit the nail on the head in regard to global warming. Somebody posted it on Lemmy.
STOP TELLING MY POOR ASS THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS ON ME
every bit of conservation i do in my life is undone by a billionaire in a weekend. I am done being blamed for it and having the responsibility thrown at my feet.
At this point the best way any one of us can do something meaningful is if we all pull a Luigi. But these memes and articles that put ask the climate change responsibility on the lower classes are nothing more than billionaire propaganda
This is a well established climate-change-laggard argument. It's the whataboutism logical fallacy.
Why should I take action, at great personal cost, when someone else is not taking action and will in fact benefit from my burden?
The Australian (and other) governments hide behind this same excuse. "Australia is just a small country, why should we take action when our CO2 production is just a small portion of that of other countries like China?".
I mean it's a good point, billionaires are worthy of great criticism, and Australia should be putting pressure on other countries, but at the same time we as individuals really do need to be taking action.
I do agree that polluting corporations use this narrative and I also find it infuriating. It's particularly palpable with plastic producers, as in plastic pollution is not their fault, but the fault of consumers failing to recycle. It's not the fault of consumers, it's the fault of regulators, who are elected by voters who are also consumers.
In summary, the whole thing is fucked and everyone sucks, but you still have to tidy up your own shit.
GO TELL BILLIONAIRES ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE! I do not want to hear it anymore, it’s not my fault, it’s not my responsibility and I can do absolutely nothing to fix it. Stop telling poor people about climate change, that’s like yelling into a hole. Go after the ones doing it, and if you think telling you that billionaires and corporations are responsible for climate change is whataboutism, you’re brainwashed by the rich
I can't believe I have to say this but, us poor people need to elect representatives that will regulate the fuck out of billionaires.
This might surprise you but plenty of poor people vote for representatives that will be mean to other poor people, rather than those who will regulate billionaires.
You still think you live in a country where those representatives exist or have a hope in hell of being elected. Bernie couldn’t even gain the support of one party, how would a progressive gain the entire country? You are far beyond the voting phase of things
We are all drops of water that make up an ocean. Billionaires are important too but it's also the fault of lazy people who put old TVs on the sidewalk instead of ewasting them. Everyone's actions add up.
You are downplaying scale. Drops of water can fall on a plant for years. Pour a one ton bucket on it and it's dead in 20 seconds.
We are not all "drops" of water. I try to be environmentally conscious in my actions not because I believe it makes a real difference, but only to keep myself from being a hypocrite. The only thing different between a hypocrite and a billionaire is a pile of money.
I think this message has good and bad uses. As a way to stop people from being doomers and not taking any action? Great. But I’ve also seen this kind of argument be used to justify an incrementalist approach to an issue that we absolutely cannot afford to go slow on or half ass. “Something is better than nothing” isn’t good enough. If we take 1 step forward and 2 steps back we’re going to lose. And that’s if the problem was linear. The fact that feedback loops accelerate the problem means we lose more and more ground the longer we wait to rip the bandaid off.
If the best allowable solution is to keep electing liberals who take money from capitalists to promote symbolic progress or “market based solutions” while continuing to approve new fossil fuel projects, then we really are doomed.
True, but also don't allow perfection to be the enemy of good.
I recall in Star Wars when the Jedi accused the Trade Federation of having invaded Naboo. Did it really? This needs to be verified, doesn't it? Oh but wait, it's the word of "Jedi", right, not just "some guys"? Yeah but can we really play at favoritism? Wait, how is that favoritism when they have an established mandate to help protect the Republic... and on and on.
Ironically, they could have sent an entire fleet, and if it turned out to be a simple misunderstanding, then oops, so well, now we know not to trust even "Jedi" in the future.
People are really bad at measuring the cost of NOT acting. Like yeah, vaccines can cause all kinds of things up to and including death... but then again, so too can a deadly disease?!
Anyway, the job of science is to figure stuff out and communicate what was found - not even - necessarily, at least usually - including translation to the general public, which is more of a reporting task. Politics doesn't even begin to enter into that. So I think it's awesome that this science post is pointing out some facts that may be relevant as people discuss the political ramifications and next steps. Ofc communication is a 2-way endeavor and if politicians don't understand what the scientist is saying, they can ask questions, but so far the OOP scientist here seems to have done her part, and quite well it looks to me (who admittedly knows next to nothing whatsoever about climate science, but at least this seems to have succeeded at the communicate clearly portion:-).
True, but also don't allow perfection to be the enemy of good.
I think this logic fundamentally misses the point. This isn't me not starting a project because I don't think I could do it perfectly so why bother. It's someone else showing me their outline for the project and telling me that I don't need to do anything, they'll get it done on time. Then it doesn't get done because they never intended to do anything, they just didn't want anyone else completing anything.
If we were just doing small things because that's all we could feasibly do for now and we're working our way up to big things, that'd be fine. It might not be enough, but it'd be what we're working with. But the small actions being taken by capitalist governments aren't designed to chip away at the problem slowly. Their purpose is to give the appearance that the current system is capable of solving the problem and someone is working on it, so we don't need to think about more radical solutions. The goal is to block progress, not merely to work on it in some slow and responsible way. "Look, the government joined a non-binding agreement saying that we're working on climate change! We should totally keep voting for them because it's better than nothing!"
It's even worse than that though. They're not just doing things for show to dampen political will for greater change. These are the same people that keep giving the military, surveillance, and police state more and more money and power. We are allowing them to build the tools they need to keep us in our place. By continuing along this path we're making it harder and harder for us to eventually do what needs to be done.
The reality is that we're not going to be able to save ourselves while capitalists are in charge. Capitalism fundamentally demands endless growth and a concentration of wealth and power. Efforts to curtail that growth will be stopped and the costs of that growth is distributed to those with less power.
As for the science/science communication part of this: I think it should be pretty clear that that isn't the problem. The science is well known at this point. The problem is that the people who have the power to fix things don't care and are so invested in the status quo that they'd sooner ratchet up violent repression before they'd actually try to solve the problem.
There's an interesting graph that someone posted in https://aussie.zone/comment/14827931, but I am no expert so I have no idea personally, just sharing that, which seems to suggest that the highest areas are residential energy and road transportation. Whether that in turn traces to Methane I have no idea:-).
The nice thing is that if we could work on either, then we could work on both at the same time. Caveat: we cannot work on either, for the most part, bc people are selfish and short-sighted:-(.
And no. We could also discover how to travel into alternate realities instead, or perhaps wake up from The Matrix? :-P
There are also a variety to ways to live differently, like a biodome even if partial. Many solutions working together rather than one singular one "saving" the day.
And this is Uplifting News - which is what it's all about!:-)
If a biodome might be needed for like 6-12 hours in the hottest part of the day for the sake of survivability and efficiency in heating, compared to being needed 20-24 hours a day, then I could begin to see the value of OOP's words. Better yet, if some other technology could bring that timeframe down to a mere 3-6 hours (I'm imagining maybe like a yearly average, so longer some days and shorter on others), and then some other technology still further down to 1-3 hours, then collectively rather than one single approach could help to reduce rather than eliminate the need for such.
Perhaps we'll live like in the Dune movie, with everyone wearing a personal stillsuit (aka the "biodome" is personal)... such that a fart primarily affects the one doing it, which at that long starts to actually convince someone to change their diet? 😉
The fart joke was a reference to the "Biodome" movie with Pauly Shore lol but I like your still suit idea
I know why we'd want to delay the inevitable with these efforts, and who knows what we'd be capable of in a few hundred years. It's just interesting to think about future proofing mankind, as in taking to the stars for refuge or living in domes.
Also profound to ponder if mankind is really worth saving.
Also, it's quite surreal that mankind has only been around for a few hundred thousand years, but only the last few hundred in the industrial age is apparently enough to kill a planet that's been around for billions of years and went through 5 extinction events. It just seems like the planet is more resilient than its life forms and it's all just panic.
Actual greatest thing you could do for climate change: destroy the US military industrial complex. Not only is it a massive polluter, it also enables the capitalists to maintain their ability to extract fossil fuels and other resources around the world.
Quit it with the anti-human shit. If we’re not saving the environment for us what’s the point?
I mean its a nice opinion but I woul disagree with the first part. The second I would agree with but more in the same way that if you are an army facing a far superior army that will not accept surrender but kill every one of you horribly you will want to fight to your last breath.
Great but I already do as much as I personally can handle. Would be great if society at large, e.g. laws, regulations, and big corps, could get on the same level.
Me: dusts off hands Installed solar on the roof, bicycling to work, updated the insulation on all my windows, and drastically reduced the amount of plastic in my life.
Tech Company Next Door: CONSUMES 70 MwH OF POWER FOR TWO YEARS STRAIGHT POWERING AN UNOPTIMIZED AI
Me: Begins flipping through a copy of How To Blow Up A Pipeline
eh, I don't think that's gonna make much of a difference:
most of the cost is probably lost revenue from the stopped flow, not the pump itself!
that said you're almost at the ideal target already!
it's best to sabotage the nexus point nearest the pipeline source: that way you knock out the largest part of the network resulting in the most damage by disabling most of the network!
tl;dr: knock out infrastructure as close to the source as possible, that isn't actually the source!
(because sabotaging the source is a really, really bad idea, see: every oil spill ever)
(and for fucks sake, don't do any of this in winter...people might freeze, if there's no time to come up with alternative energy sources...which is why late spring is the best time to blow up a pipeline! :D )
"guarded" is usually a fence and some cameras, maybe a locked door. Honestly an easier target than any buried pipeline. Kind of surprising we don't see more ELF action on this front, except for the whole 'get sent to jail forever to make an example of you' thing.
It's not "all" you can do, though. At what point does "eco-terrorism" turn into "justified self-defense?"
Tuesday.
I agree, many of us have maxed out passive improvements. Now let's work on active.
Call your local oil company CEO. Get a job at Exxon and really half ass it. Visit your town government and demand better public transport and electric busses. Take a dump on the nearest gas pump.
Only some of those are jokes and I'm not sure which.
Don't poop on stuff you don't own.
Bad news for everyone who rents their home, and thus doesn’t technically own a toilet :(
Oof, it's gonna get sticky with that last group, there. 😅
There’s a clear difference between being in big trouble and being completely screwed. If we can avoid the extinction of humanity and go with catastrophic disasters and famine that eradicates vast majority of the population, we should totally do it.
Ideally, we would avoid all that, and go back to the good old days. Every small step towards that goal is worth it, although taking longer steps is highly encouraged.
Is climate change an extinction level threat? I've never heard that.
I think we're firmly in "catastrophic disasters and famine that eradicates vast majority of the population" territory.
It's a question, as you said, of how severe the disasters and famine will be.
I read somewhere before that the release of methane from the melting ice caps (?) could create a knock on effect of global warming turning the Earth into another Venus
How much of that is actually true I never looked further into.
The planet has previously been 15C above current levels due to flood volcanism so earth turning into a Venus just straight up isn't happening. It is potentially mechanically possible but we're talking conditions so extreme that we couldn't make it happen even if we wanted too with our current level of technology.
Actually, level of warming that could directly wipe humanity is technically possible, even the hopium dealers among climate scientists admit that (notably Michael E. Mann). But even if it doesn't kill all of us directly, it will likely generate a domino effect for other existential threats.
This is highly speculative, because climate science is fiendishly complex, and the error bars in these estimates are as wide as the solar system. However, there is a concept called the “runaway greenhouse effect”, in which the global average temperature spirals out of control, roasting the entire plant. Not exactly the kind of concept you want to think about too much.
its to late, its over, to prevent catastrophe.
its not to late to ensure we have a minimal catastrophe instead of a maximal catastrophe.
::: spoiler NOT Uplifting I strongly believe that there's a regression of global society that will prevent humanity from surviving the next k/t level impact. I weakly believe that the climate catastrophe that we are headed toward currently will cause such a regression. I weakly believe that if we don't take global action in the next 4-5 years, we will be unable to avoid a catastrophe of that scale.
I don't think the current global leadership can be convinced through lobbying. Non-violent opportunities to replace the global leadership are dwindling. When/if only violent means remain, I will simply enjoy what wealth I have until I am extinguished by the Glorious Revolution as the Bourgeoisie scum I will have become.
:::
Actually, it's too late, because those in power are accelerating in the wrong direction and we are less and less able to prevent them to do so.
And even so, given the current state of the society, even the "best case scenario" will be enough to make it collapse.
Yes, thats exactly the kind of useless, defeatest post and sentiment that the Op was talking about.
That's the ticket! It's always great when a random
idiotstranger on the internet agrees with you... (no, really:-P).At some point, defeatism is just realism, no matter the amout of hopium people try to sell to you.
Then do us all a favour and remove yourself, if you're going to go full nihilist and hopelessness. If all you are willing to do is be inactive and continue to consume then we'd rather not have you around doing nothing but contributing to the problem.
OR
Join the rest of us and DO SOMETHING! Fight for something you want, do you remember that feeling? Have you ever known it or have you always been this pathetic? And if you truly believe that there is no hope then why not end it all by taking out some of these polluting fuckers with you?! Don't get depressed, get radicalised!!!
Above a certain threshold there will be no discernible difference in the outcome to our civilisation.
The planet is fine. The people are fucked. G. Carlin was and is right.
No offense, but this is exactly the kind of active pessimism that this post is trying to combat. The only mindset that creates positive change is active optimism. In other words, hope for better and taking action to try and get there.
Note that this is not to be confused with inactive optimism. "Everything will just work out on its own". That also doesn't work.
Active pessimism is the most damaging mindset, though, because it actively drains others of their will to make things better. Feeling hopeless is real and understandable, I've been feeling it, too. Spreading it around and shutting down those who are trying to do better isn't the way to process it, though.
I agree with you, but I'm not sure the post is really effective for that goal.
Fucking hope police with their unscientific view that honest assessments and factual information are less important than optimism.
The OP's tweet is wrong.
This is undeniable.
There are certain limits past which feedback loops kick in and after which our actions won't matter.
We shoudn't rely on carbon capture, the technology is still at an embryonary stage and will not be ready on time to have a significant impact. Nor on a nuclear winter, for obvious reasons.
FYI: wrong user; check names again ;)
Carbon capture and nuclear winter won't do a goddamn thing if the clathrate gun goes boom, and it is looking like it has:
https://english.elpais.com/climate/2025-02-12/massive-methane-leaks-detected-in-antarctica-posing-potential-risks-for-global-warming.html
And that single release, equivalent to two years of human output, is the tip of the spear.
Hope police want to argue that if we are calm about things and don't point out the dire situation we're in, we'll somehow manage.
It's the same argument as telling a passenger in a car driving towards a cliff at 50 mph, close enough that seconds matter, to not yell 'CLIFF! BRAKE!' Because it would demoralize the driver, and should instead calmly inform the driver that we might have some problems if they don't stop applying pressure to the gas.
Except that this is the argument that hope police give to people screaming to pull the brake. Not just to people black pilled.
Okay. But every minute we can delay reaching that threshold will be worth it.
To me it's the same as the US democracy right now. Yes it's far too late to see no ill effects and we are already facing the consequences, but every act of resistance to unlawful, immoral and unconstitutional orders slow them down, and with enough co-ordination may slow them down enough before Trump and the oligarchs become truly unstoppable.
For any issue that effects our world's existence, stand boldly and take action. Don't let the fear of the inevitability of it consume you.
In fact, they are already unstoppable. History showed us many times that when autocrats are in full power, they keep it forever, unless they lose a war or die without having planified their succession. And don't talk me about the Biden example, his presidency did not prevented an unpreceded harm by the GOP.
It's precisely this mentality I'm arguing against (the unstoppableness of Trump, that's what he wants you to think).
People only have power over you, if you obey their command. MAGA obeys Trump, that's why Trump has power over MAGA. Whether he has power over the rest of America depends on how much Americans want to defend it from his ongoing attacks, which are happening right now and will continue. "Right now" means that it's not too late. Giving up and conceding means giving Trump a free pass to wreck the USA.
Your statement is extremely naive, because when a politician establish a rule, you are legally forced to follow it, and believe me, the authorities don't care about the means to enforce the said rules if they don't want to follow them. Resistance to Trump will lead to increased repression, you should not forget he is a known authoritarian. If you want to risk your freedom -if not your physical integrity- to set yourself above the law, good for you, but don't incite people to do so.
“The Earth will just shake us off like a bad case of fleas.”
It'll at least determine how many species survive. And the threshold to total human extinction is very high, so every ton of co2 is part of a life saved.
It’s just a question of how bad we’ll have it at this point.
I was going to argue that you only need wait for the US to surpass the UK in silencing dissent, but then you said civilized.. I’m not so sure that the US can compete based on that metric anymore.
I don't believe in the possibility of mass civil disobediance, especially in a context where most of people are either depolitized, either are voting massively for (wannabe) autocrats.
I feel like in a way, it is too late. The human race decided it doesn't care to fight climate change. There is going to be significant disruptions, especially near the equator. But on the other hand, even if we overshoot our climate targets, there is always a chance for us to reverse the damage dealt using technology and by reclamation of ecosystems that have been destroyed. I think as long as our species survives we can fix things. But we need a massive, massive change in attitude to muster the political will to do something.
Yeah, it kinda seems like humanity wants to ride that tiger
Kind of feels like in 20-30 years time we'll be claiming its worth fighting for a climate that doesn't immediately kill us if we go outside for 20 minutes instead of 15.
Or to put it another way, do these scientists not see there's a difference between living and surviving?
Ok
God forbid someone tries to think past the next quarter.
If the future can't be livable and people just wants a quiet suicide for the human race I've got good news. There's a very easy solution for avoiding that discomfort that also happens to be the #1 way to reduce your carbon footprint.
But if you want to keep living and not just surviving, suck it up...
The post is right, but only on the paper, and not really in a world that is progressively taken over by ecocidal autocrats whose program is to kill every bit of efforts in climate fight, so even the smallest progress we made will soon be distant memories and fighting will be increasingly dangerous and difficult and, ultimately, virtually impossible. And the locked-in catastrophes are now sufficient to collapse our already fragilized geopolitical context.
People saying it's "not too late" are systematically downplaying the current political context, wich make their message pretty unconsistent.
I didn’t get that at all from the OP, what I saw was “every bit matters so keep fighting.”
Yes, until the political situation make it unfeasible without being treated like a dangerous terrorist. The OP didn't said it either, but she should have.
OP says "I am a climate scientist and thus is correct⬇️", thus leading me to believe that it was the climate science under discussion, not politics.
If anything the current political context makes what needs to be done pretty clear. There's a difference between downplaying the problem and realizing that if laying down and dieing isn't an option.
So... It IS too late?
A bit sad how pessimistic everyone is. Renewables are currently becoming the most economic way to produce electricity and even states that do not care about the environment are investing in it. EVs are making progress as well. And while it is true that a lot of damage has already been done and we will face the consequences, I also feel that decarbonization is inevitable even from a economic perspective at this point. The speed at which this happens is variable though and determines how many people will die, this is why it is important to not be pessimistic and hopeless but to try steering things in the right direction.
Americans are pessimistic because we don't have a functional democracy and our fascist oligarchs are too stupid to use their resources to fight climate change.... And the rest of the world is pessimistic because the world's most powerful economy and military has fallen to fascist oligarchy.
Nothing will change until we abolish the billionaires and replace our two party system with a modern multiparty parliamentary system with proportional representation
USAmericans have a religious attachment to fossil fuels that I can't understand. "Drill baby drill" isn't even economically viable and yet has become a call to prayer for many US politicians.
It's rich people who want to keep being rich without risking going into a different thing.
Please stop attributing it to everyone, it's really annoying
Who is voting for them and why do they win elections if there isn't a substantial of people who support the idea? "Drill baby drill" isn't a secret, it is what Republicans have been running on for over a decade.
Just slightly more people (who bother to vote) than who don't. Doesn't make it 100%, it's not rocket science.
Many USAmericans are pessimistic because we were finally taking a medium sized step in the right direction, and somehow half the country thinks that’s a bad thing
Personally, the "renewable" energies aren't making me hopeful. Because they are absolutly not renewable, they can't be build without pollution because of the materials you need. And even so, climate change is not even the worst of our existential threats, there are many more, but strangely, people are only talking about climate.
Human history consists of us solving problems which then create more, bigger problems.
Agriculture was a trap.
Some might say also... The Internet?
Mind elaborating on the other threats?
Soil depletion, (micro)plastics in the water, biodiversity collapse, political instability, economical crisis, nuclear menace that is not a thing of the past anymore, sanitary crisis that will likely be worse than COVID, to name a few.
Soil depletion is solved by climate change by freeing up frozen arable land of countries that are basically under a blanket of ice for the whole year
True. The Middle East is the fastest growing renewable market after China and the Middle East already has very low fossil fuels and electricity prices. Of course they don't have absurd tariffs on Chinese renewables.
The Middle East would rather sell their product to other people than use it themselves.
"Never get high on your own supply"
OPEC members have excess capacity. Saudi Arabia for example can produce an additional 3 million barrels per day without having to do anything or spend anything. So no, your assessment is wrong.
We couldn't get people to wear a mask or get a shot when a disease was killing millions in the open.
We definitely can't get people to change their behavior over climate change.
That's because billionaires like Robert Murdock own all our media and they use their power to push disinformation to undermine class solidarity and democracy.
If we want to save the world then we have to get rid of the billionaires asap as they are the greatest threat to democracy.
Then maybe don't leave it up to them. This OOP refers to a goal, not a process.
I'm not sure this tweet counts as news?
A fair concern. It's no peer reviewed research article that's for sure, but it was somewhat news to me and may be to others who likewise did not know and/or needed to hear it.
"News" here meaning from an authoritative source (though I did not confirm that this person even so much as exists, much less is actually a climate scientist) and bringing information that is not trivially already known to the audience.
A lot of the "news" focuses on the tipping point (to be able to reverse the effects of climate change), thus leaving a gap between that vs. what we are now desiring more to know: just how fucked are we all?
But if it needs to be removed, that's okay with me - I don't want to mess up the community's implementation of the rules.
Ok, got it. No burning at the stake. We'll use guillotines.👍
That can be totally misread.
"oh good then we don't have to do anything right now"
I don't know if it's really selfish more people are a part of a system that is bigger than them that forces them into situations that have a negative impact on CO2 levels
Working a job that has low pay which probably force people to housing that is further from their work place, in America most cities don't have a great public transportation infrastructure nor do they have alternative commuting options like protected bike lanes. This forces people to have to drive more.
The Return to Office bullshit has forced more cars on the road that were not there 4 years ago which is impacting CO2 levels
These are just 2 of many different things that the system has created that have put people in situations that make slowing CO2 levels more difficult.
Yeah I mean...we are all born into an already existing system. I guess we could all kill ourselves to help the planet, but that's not really a great option for the self. I don't have the power to change my country's infrastructure as a singular being.
There's a scene in the show Utopia where one of the antagonists is talking to a woman with her child at the bus station. She says they could drive but it's better for the planet if she takes the bus.
He says if she wants to save the planet she should kill her kid, because raising a child in a first world nation is one of the most carbon-intense things you can do if you can't afford a private jet.
Would that even matter? As in e.g. the timing and speed - like those still alive would keep going for quite awhile, perhaps all the more so given increasing technology, especially if the effects of aging were to be if not eliminated entirely then pushed back even a little bit more, or cancer, etc.
The average population isn't too selfish, the 1% is.
They wouldn't have made it to the richest 1% if they weren't so selfish, and now they have great power over us all, especially regarding the climate.
And yet all that pales in comparison to a CEO taking a private jet to work hundreds of miles every day.
And all that pales in comparison to the amount of CO2 released by the cargo ships and planes going all around the world every day to support our global economy.
Not trying to absolve the average Joe of their responsibility towards the environment, but like, there's only so much actually in our control. And even if every single one of us 99%ers did everything in our power correctly, unless we see huge global systematic changes at the policy level (like we did with the ozone layer), it probably won't be enough.
Yeah, and who's fueling said global economy? Regular people browsing Shein ordering ridiculous amounts of plastic-wrapped shit priced at ridiculously low levels.
Carbon tax is the only solution because it would affect both the rich and the poor. Yeah sure a rich CEO wouldn't feel a simple 2 or 3 fold cost increase to their jet-setting, but if at the same time their company makes a lot less money because people ain't buying their pointless shit now that carbon is taxed and things are expensive? That CEO might just start flying less too. And we'd need way fewer cargo ships operating if people bought fewer goods. Oh and manufacturing might become more decentralized again once carbon tax from transportation is an actual cost to consider.
Thing is, nobody is going to want a carbon tax. We'd all have to be inconvenienced for that. We all take so much shit for granted. So we're all fucked.
Sure, yes, average people play their part in the global economy. But I think the infinite growth mentality is a big part of it too, which again, falls solely on the CEOs.
Ultimately I do agree with your overall assessment, things do feel kinda hopeless right now, because it just doesn't seem like very many people in a position to make a difference are really doing anything.
Where news
Seriously, if there's one thing I don't miss from reddit (I tell a lie, there's dozens of things I don't miss from Reddit) it's the "Actually we're too far gone, and everyone's going to die in seven days because none of you jokers will buy a Tesla!~" nonsense
Funfact: Conspiracy Bullshit in the other direction is still Conspiracy Bullshit
Really? I knew it had gotten bad over there since the Rexodus but wow, it sounds rough. I'm so glad we are over here in The Good Place instead. Wait a minute...!? 🤡
I was going to present a partial rebuttal invoking politics but then I saw that this is [email protected].
Another positive is that we humans are highly adaptive. We’re already making a lot of changes towards renewables and improving the efficiency and reliability of our electric grids and other large infrastructure. Climate change definitely brings a ton of challenges with it (and some of the changes have already taken place) but I think it also gives us new opportunities such as longer growing seasons up North.
I don't think healthy skepticism is forbidden here, so feel free to write your rebuttal.
She is right, but the thing thats missing is that this isnt co2 you will keep in a container in your garage. So if I dont use a petrol car, this doesnt remove the petrol. It just means someone else will burn it.
Unless there is supply-side constraints or CO2 capture this has 0 effect
Some humans are more adaptive than others. The ones that have been sitting around with their heads in the sand aren't going to survive.
Whether or not people survive is going to depend a lot on luck, unfortunately. People in low-lying third world countries are gonna be in the tightest spot.
You're confusing completely averting things, with mitigating how bad they are.
It's the difference between "really bad" and "even worse".
i saw a video on youtube, by someone named sabine said everyone gave up on climate action, yea they gave up like years ago, the only miracle was when lockdown happened, and global co2 fell very fast and nature quickly reclaimed certain areas. like they pretended to care, but never did anything to stop it. even in research i heard that you cant frame climate change was leaning towards caused by "people" or your research wont get funded, thats how bad funding grant sis for research for some universities.
sabine also posted absolute horseshit about trans people so I don't trust anything she says about science anymore
She posted a nuanced video about hormones and surgery on trans-identified minors, that considered both sides of the issue. If you find that "absolute horseshit" then you are not interested in science but in religion.
get out of here. there's no both sides to the issue and she used faulty evidence to push bullshit that's been debunked over and over.
I heard she made another dumbass video about autism but couldn't stomach to go through it.
she's full of shit.
So religion then
if you don't understand what words mean, then yeah sure
Hmm
Remember that it can always be worse. Even if it's irreversible in our lifetimes, it can always be hotter and more extreme.
It's never too late if you seriously consider all your options Ie:
Full nuclear energy development with SMRs
Fusion reactors research
Full transition to electric/hydrogen vehicles
Economic sanctions to countries with grid power coming from carbon/ non renewable resources above a certain percentage
Full development of lunar/cis lunar infrastructure/space
Large scale deployment of solar mirror arrays designed to reflect incoming sunlight, built using lunar regolith as raw materials source
Blowing an 88 megatons hydrogen bomb under the sea, below 8 to 12 Km under the ocean floor surface to trigger about 30 years of carbon capture in a second
You know, easy stuff
And so on
The US is fucked anyway, but if China and the EU worked together, greatness could be approved on potentially the most important front:
However, the one I'm most curious about is the following:
How would this work? I'm really interested in the mechanics of this, not so much the feasibility (which is non-existent anyway)
Oh the biggest bomb one is actually extremely simple
. Create (an) hydrogen) atomic bomb(s) with yield equal to or similar to 88 megatons . Go to seabed , about 12 km down on Ocean floor
. Drill about 8 to 12 km into basalt ( basalt is a mineral that fixes to carbon )
. Detonate bomb
. Watch trillions of basalt mineral get pulverized instantly into the sea
. Allow sea currents to distribute this all over the world
. Watch how oceans start absorbing more CO2
. Watch as global temperatures drop a degree and a half (1.5)
Repeat as needed, remember not to overdo it. Thankfully the ocean is extremely good at absorbing any radiation if any dares to escape
Hmm something tells me this might cause unforeseen consequences for aquatic life... But we won't know until we try!
Well, the alternative is very foreseeable consequences for aquatic life. I'm sure they'd be on board
Well you wouldn't explode it just anywhere, there are tons of deserted seabed places about.
The best is that the explosion would be mitigated greatly by the teratons of basalt and water over the explosion
O...k...a...y... lemme just get right onto that now... You know what, I think I'll take a nap, and perhaps get back to it tomorrow? 👨🔬☢️💥
Don't worry bro we've got people working on it as we speak
I'm a pessimist in that even in the best possible situation humans would still find a way to overpopulate the earth until no solution is viable. We are parasites
Don't disagree that civilization is a parasite, but a lot of parasites evolve to not kill their host 🙂
We are categorically not parasites. We don't live in/on another organism deriving nutritional value from the bodies as hosts
We and other animals eat plants/plan eaters directly. We are not hosted by plants or plant eaters.
If that were the case, other animals would also be parasites. At most, we are predators
There are many definitions of parasites tho and all hinge on the time the parasite spends in/on the host
Indeed, read the Exxon-Mobil report from the late 1970's and early 80's. They hit the nail on the head in regard to global warming. Somebody posted it on Lemmy.
Wait a minute... TIL that Lemmy existed in the late 1970's!? 🤪🤡🤥🫠
STOP TELLING MY POOR ASS THAT CLIMATE CHANGE IS ON ME
every bit of conservation i do in my life is undone by a billionaire in a weekend. I am done being blamed for it and having the responsibility thrown at my feet. At this point the best way any one of us can do something meaningful is if we all pull a Luigi. But these memes and articles that put ask the climate change responsibility on the lower classes are nothing more than billionaire propaganda
This Tweet isn't blaming you.
To me, this argument sounds like someone trying to justify their own littering because corporations don't dispose of their waste properly.
This is a well established climate-change-laggard argument. It's the whataboutism logical fallacy.
Why should I take action, at great personal cost, when someone else is not taking action and will in fact benefit from my burden?
The Australian (and other) governments hide behind this same excuse. "Australia is just a small country, why should we take action when our CO2 production is just a small portion of that of other countries like China?".
I mean it's a good point, billionaires are worthy of great criticism, and Australia should be putting pressure on other countries, but at the same time we as individuals really do need to be taking action.
I do agree that polluting corporations use this narrative and I also find it infuriating. It's particularly palpable with plastic producers, as in plastic pollution is not their fault, but the fault of consumers failing to recycle. It's not the fault of consumers, it's the fault of regulators, who are elected by voters who are also consumers.
In summary, the whole thing is fucked and everyone sucks, but you still have to tidy up your own shit.
GO TELL BILLIONAIRES ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE! I do not want to hear it anymore, it’s not my fault, it’s not my responsibility and I can do absolutely nothing to fix it. Stop telling poor people about climate change, that’s like yelling into a hole. Go after the ones doing it, and if you think telling you that billionaires and corporations are responsible for climate change is whataboutism, you’re brainwashed by the rich
How can we tell billionaires about climate change? By voting. Poor people vote.
They don’t give a fuck about voting. Make their life miserable everywhere they go at the least, bust out the guillotines would be ideal.
I can't believe I have to say this but, us poor people need to elect representatives that will regulate the fuck out of billionaires. This might surprise you but plenty of poor people vote for representatives that will be mean to other poor people, rather than those who will regulate billionaires.
You still think you live in a country where those representatives exist or have a hope in hell of being elected. Bernie couldn’t even gain the support of one party, how would a progressive gain the entire country? You are far beyond the voting phase of things
Sadly I think you've missed my point.
We are all drops of water that make up an ocean. Billionaires are important too but it's also the fault of lazy people who put old TVs on the sidewalk instead of ewasting them. Everyone's actions add up.
You are downplaying scale. Drops of water can fall on a plant for years. Pour a one ton bucket on it and it's dead in 20 seconds. We are not all "drops" of water. I try to be environmentally conscious in my actions not because I believe it makes a real difference, but only to keep myself from being a hypocrite. The only thing different between a hypocrite and a billionaire is a pile of money.
I still do my part, but it’s for my own integrity, not for saving the world.
I think this message has good and bad uses. As a way to stop people from being doomers and not taking any action? Great. But I’ve also seen this kind of argument be used to justify an incrementalist approach to an issue that we absolutely cannot afford to go slow on or half ass. “Something is better than nothing” isn’t good enough. If we take 1 step forward and 2 steps back we’re going to lose. And that’s if the problem was linear. The fact that feedback loops accelerate the problem means we lose more and more ground the longer we wait to rip the bandaid off.
If the best allowable solution is to keep electing liberals who take money from capitalists to promote symbolic progress or “market based solutions” while continuing to approve new fossil fuel projects, then we really are doomed.
True, but also don't allow perfection to be the enemy of good.
I recall in Star Wars when the Jedi accused the Trade Federation of having invaded Naboo. Did it really? This needs to be verified, doesn't it? Oh but wait, it's the word of "Jedi", right, not just "some guys"? Yeah but can we really play at favoritism? Wait, how is that favoritism when they have an established mandate to help protect the Republic... and on and on.
Ironically, they could have sent an entire fleet, and if it turned out to be a simple misunderstanding, then oops, so well, now we know not to trust even "Jedi" in the future.
People are really bad at measuring the cost of NOT acting. Like yeah, vaccines can cause all kinds of things up to and including death... but then again, so too can a deadly disease?!
Anyway, the job of science is to figure stuff out and communicate what was found - not even - necessarily, at least usually - including translation to the general public, which is more of a reporting task. Politics doesn't even begin to enter into that. So I think it's awesome that this science post is pointing out some facts that may be relevant as people discuss the political ramifications and next steps. Ofc communication is a 2-way endeavor and if politicians don't understand what the scientist is saying, they can ask questions, but so far the OOP scientist here seems to have done her part, and quite well it looks to me (who admittedly knows next to nothing whatsoever about climate science, but at least this seems to have succeeded at the communicate clearly portion:-).
I think this logic fundamentally misses the point. This isn't me not starting a project because I don't think I could do it perfectly so why bother. It's someone else showing me their outline for the project and telling me that I don't need to do anything, they'll get it done on time. Then it doesn't get done because they never intended to do anything, they just didn't want anyone else completing anything.
If we were just doing small things because that's all we could feasibly do for now and we're working our way up to big things, that'd be fine. It might not be enough, but it'd be what we're working with. But the small actions being taken by capitalist governments aren't designed to chip away at the problem slowly. Their purpose is to give the appearance that the current system is capable of solving the problem and someone is working on it, so we don't need to think about more radical solutions. The goal is to block progress, not merely to work on it in some slow and responsible way. "Look, the government joined a non-binding agreement saying that we're working on climate change! We should totally keep voting for them because it's better than nothing!"
It's even worse than that though. They're not just doing things for show to dampen political will for greater change. These are the same people that keep giving the military, surveillance, and police state more and more money and power. We are allowing them to build the tools they need to keep us in our place. By continuing along this path we're making it harder and harder for us to eventually do what needs to be done.
The reality is that we're not going to be able to save ourselves while capitalists are in charge. Capitalism fundamentally demands endless growth and a concentration of wealth and power. Efforts to curtail that growth will be stopped and the costs of that growth is distributed to those with less power.
As for the science/science communication part of this: I think it should be pretty clear that that isn't the problem. The science is well known at this point. The problem is that the people who have the power to fix things don't care and are so invested in the status quo that they'd sooner ratchet up violent repression before they'd actually try to solve the problem.
So it sounds like the first step is to care.
As the OOP said too.
Humanity has to continue unshitting its pants.
Well, global meat consumption per Capita is going down YOY so something is working.
Methane gas is basically our greatest enemy at this point
There's an interesting graph that someone posted in https://aussie.zone/comment/14827931, but I am no expert so I have no idea personally, just sharing that, which seems to suggest that the highest areas are residential energy and road transportation. Whether that in turn traces to Methane I have no idea:-).
I mean from the cow farts but yeah. If we can do that one at the same time as carbon much better
The nice thing is that if we could work on either, then we could work on both at the same time. Caveat: we cannot work on either, for the most part, bc people are selfish and short-sighted:-(.
Billion, with a "B".
And no. We could also discover how to travel into alternate realities instead, or perhaps wake up from The Matrix? :-P
There are also a variety to ways to live differently, like a biodome even if partial. Many solutions working together rather than one singular one "saving" the day.
And this is Uplifting News - which is what it's all about!:-)
I meant "Billion". Pardon me.
All it takes is one rank fart to ruin the Biodome idea.
But I'm glad to be living during this time frame, however.
If a biodome might be needed for like 6-12 hours in the hottest part of the day for the sake of survivability and efficiency in heating, compared to being needed 20-24 hours a day, then I could begin to see the value of OOP's words. Better yet, if some other technology could bring that timeframe down to a mere 3-6 hours (I'm imagining maybe like a yearly average, so longer some days and shorter on others), and then some other technology still further down to 1-3 hours, then collectively rather than one single approach could help to reduce rather than eliminate the need for such.
Perhaps we'll live like in the Dune movie, with everyone wearing a personal stillsuit (aka the "biodome" is personal)... such that a fart primarily affects the one doing it, which at that long starts to actually convince someone to change their diet? 😉
"Ruin" itself is a word with nuances.
The fart joke was a reference to the "Biodome" movie with Pauly Shore lol but I like your still suit idea
I know why we'd want to delay the inevitable with these efforts, and who knows what we'd be capable of in a few hundred years. It's just interesting to think about future proofing mankind, as in taking to the stars for refuge or living in domes.
Also profound to ponder if mankind is really worth saving.
Also, it's quite surreal that mankind has only been around for a few hundred thousand years, but only the last few hundred in the industrial age is apparently enough to kill a planet that's been around for billions of years and went through 5 extinction events. It just seems like the planet is more resilient than its life forms and it's all just panic.
Damnit, you just made me realize that my true goal in life was to wear a stillsuit (or maybe it was to be closer to Timothée Chalamet?😊)
We're on course for our oceans to acidify and air to be unbreathable in many places before the end of the century.
It doesn't get a lot worse than that
That's why we do what we can to reduce it just like the post said! Wow!!!
Actual greatest thing you could do for climate change: destroy the US military industrial complex. Not only is it a massive polluter, it also enables the capitalists to maintain their ability to extract fossil fuels and other resources around the world.
Quit it with the anti-human shit. If we’re not saving the environment for us what’s the point?
I mean its a nice opinion but I woul disagree with the first part. The second I would agree with but more in the same way that if you are an army facing a far superior army that will not accept surrender but kill every one of you horribly you will want to fight to your last breath.
I feel qualified neither to agree nor disagree, since I am not a climate scientist.