|
Owl stop fetishizing the act of being abroad.
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 19:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:15 |
|
|
Let's determine the approximate cost of everyone doing an international flight from JFK -> LHR and back. CO2 per passenger per mile: ~0.24 lbs (108 grams) The total round trip distance is: 6880 mi The total global population is about: 7,600,000,000 108g CO2/mi * 6880mi * 7600000000 = 5.6 petagrams of CO2 Yearly emissions of CO2 are currently around 35-40 PgCO2e In theory, we could support one flight per person per lifetime. Doing this would move the needle on global emissions but not enough to require large shifts in other usage areas. Any more than this (e.g. you let every person do 10 flights in their lifetime or longer flights) and this turns into a single cause that could force us to miss 2C targets. Notorious R.I.M. fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:05
|
|
|
Which is to say if everyone on the globe took up our coddled first world child's stance on air travel, then their grandkids are going to enjoy living off of jellyfish until they die of hydrogen sulfide poisoning. Going off of something like http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/3/9/e1700906.full, the remaining budget to prevent ocean anoxia and a permian-triassic style extinction event is somewhere on the order of 300 petagrams as per their 310 ± 155 Pg C tipping point calculation.
Notorious R.I.M. fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:10
|
|
|
Tochiazuma posted:Are you going to mandate that when the masses of tourists arrive in these countries that they don't bunker down in isolated tourist traps? Because I seriously doubt that most tourists are seeing the 'real' Mexico, for example, when they head over to it. Do what you can within what your means allow you. It's almost infinitely open ended. Watching a french film in with your regular movies sometimes is better than never doing that, taking a day trip to quebec once is better than watching the movies, taking a one time tourist trip to paris is better than that, going to other parts of france and a trip to french speaking africa would be even better, living in those places for extended amounts of time would give even infinitely more understanding than visiting. Every step up is hugely richer and better and people should do what they are able. MiddleOne posted:Owl stop fetishizing the act of being abroad. No, it's literally the world we live in. There is no interest anyone should have that should be placed higher than their interest in the world and the people here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:18
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Every step up is hugely richer and better and people should do what they are able. libertarianism and ecological health are incompatible
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Which is to say if everyone on the globe took up our coddled first world child's stance on air travel, then their grandkids are going to enjoy living off of jellyfish until they die of hydrogen sulfide poisoning. If the human race can get to the point everyone can see that everyone else uses the toilet really weird then we have done enough and can retire to a good death.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 20:45
|
|
|
Well I guess the latest few posts disproves the bourgie self-justification theory that traveling makes you a better person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Well I guess the latest few posts disproves the bourgie self-justification theory that traveling makes you a better person. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:13
|
|
|
Any work ups on mass-immigration and mass-urbanization? Cities are more efficient than many ruralities. Plus, "What if everyone lived in a single city with the density of Paris?," would be a fun data point. Like how many large graphite sequestration-cubes would we need to get all this darned carbon out of the environment. (If it's sequestered in a giant cube it's not in the environment anymore.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:Let's determine the approximate cost of everyone doing an international flight from JFK -> LHR and back. Plus the TSA line would be insane
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:30
|
|
|
Accretionist posted:Any work ups on mass-immigration and mass-urbanization? Cities are more efficient than many ruralities. Cities are more efficient. They are also significantly more expensive compared to suburbs.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:32
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Well I guess the latest few posts disproves the bourgie self-justification theory that traveling makes you a better person. It definitely does make you a more well-rounded and open-minded person, although it obviously depends on context. Jumping on a cruise ship and occasionally stopping at some port city is unlikely to teach you anything about those places. Hiking Machu Pichu or doing volunteer work in Africa however will change you for the better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:37
|
|
|
welp gotta go to africa to help the savages *ignores every regional program that exists*. love too cargo cult christian evangelism in the global south.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 21:41
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:welp gotta go to africa to help the savages *ignores every regional program that exists*. love too cargo cult christian evangelism in the global south. The point is to interact with people you have little or nothing in common.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:13
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:The point is to interact with people you have little or nothing in common. why do you need to fly to machu pichu to do that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
enraged_camel posted:It definitely does make you a more well-rounded and open-minded person, although it obviously depends on context. Jumping on a cruise ship and occasionally stopping at some port city is unlikely to teach you anything about those places. Hiking Machu Pichu or doing volunteer work in Africa however will change you for the better. I would say anything that expands anyone's personal horizons is always a net good for any person. Like someone coming back from their 87th cruise probably is getting pretty marginal returns in enlightenment from that but if someone has spent their whole life relatively sheltered even a very guided and minor stop in another city in another region is going to open their eyes more than they were open. Even a super safe cruise tour would extremely challenge the worldview of someone that for example had strong but totally nonfactual opinions about things that are or aren't possible in america. If someone is passionately arguing society requires a thing or can not function without it and you can say "marie, you've been a place like that, you thought it was great" and even that can be a huge deal for someone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:16
|
|
|
self unaware posted:why do you need to fly to machu pichu to do that? No one that lives in the same town as you has a perspective or life experience as different from you as anyone that lives in rural peru does. (like, unless someone in your town flew on a plane to you from peru, I guess).
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:20
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:If someone is passionately arguing society requires a thing or can not function without it and you can say "marie, you've been a place like that, you thought it was great" and even that can be a huge deal for someone.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:21
|
|
|
No one is denying that travel can make you more well-rounded. However, the pro-travel apologists are denying that there are extremely steep costs with doing it, and it only works out for them so far because they are part of a limited global elite that can afford air travel.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:24
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:No one that lives in the same town as you has a perspective or life experience as different from you as anyone that lives in rural peru does. (like, unless someone in your town flew on a plane to you from peru, I guess). alright maybe there's some middle ground between "leaving the town you live in" and "flying to peru and hiking machu pichu" sidenote, white people don't hike machu pichu to "meet rural peruvians"
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:27
|
|
|
His Divine Shadow posted:Well I guess the latest few posts disproves the bourgie self-justification theory that traveling makes you a better person.  Owlofcreamcheese posted:No, it's literally the world we live in. There is no interest anyone should have that should be placed higher than their interest in the world and the people here. What about the interest of preserving that world by not unnecessarily polluting and destroying the planet through climate change? Where do you feel that scales on the priority list? 
MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Jan 8, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
Good thing the internet exists so that I can talk to and learn from people living all over the world without having to fly anywhere. Kind of like what I am doing right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 22:54
|
|
|
And to revisit a point I keep making about our climate models becoming more inaccurate as we pass the cusp of stability (e.g. we go outside known previous interglacial maxima): https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/950487160884428801
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:04
|
|
|
Casual international travel is p dumb imo, people collect destinations like they were idiot pogs or something. I really don't care where you went last november. I wish it was more socially acceptable to out travellers as selfish narcissists with more money than sense instead of people envying their 'omg so location-independent lifestyle'.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
Chadzok posted:Casual international travel is p dumb imo, people collect destinations like they were idiot pogs or something. I really don't care where you went last november. For most of the world, international travel is a lot easier than interstate travel is in the US
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:15
|
|
|
Chadzok posted:Casual international travel is p dumb imo, people collect destinations like they were idiot pogs or something. I really don't care where you went last november. Nice red text. You might change your opinion if you ever get outside your mom’s basement.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:16
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:What about the interest of preserving that world by not unnecessarily polluting and destroying the planet through climate change? Where do you feel that scales on the priority list? Then work on ways to get travel to be cleaner and better for the planet. Otherwise it just looks like a really transparent attempt to push extreme isolationism under some false guise of "protecting the planet". Flight does create pollution, quite a bit of it, but if you are going to create X tons of carbon it's one of the best things as a person you could use it for. If there was a yearly carbon budget per person more spent on travel and less spent on other things would be a net good for the world. Also it is very obvious that if a wizard invented a carbon free plane a bunch of people would just move on to some new reason they suddenly decided everyone needs to stay in their own country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:21
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Then work on ways to get travel to be cleaner and better for the planet. Otherwise it just looks like a really transparent attempt to push extreme isolationism under some false guise of "protecting the planet". Flight does create pollution, quite a bit of it, but if you are going to create X tons of carbon it's one of the best things as a person you could use it for. If there was a yearly carbon budget per person more spent on travel and less spent on other things would be a net good for the world. If there was a yearly budget for carbon then one international flight per year would blow over half your entire budget. There's a reason that planes will be one of the last modes of travel to ever convert off of fossil fuels and it has everything to do with energy density. Fix that and I don't care how you travel. Are you too stupid to look at the quantitative cost of traveling or would you rather stick your head in the sand to keep your cognitive dissonance at bay?
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:28
|
|
|
Just lol if you don't travel by solar-powered airship dirigible
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:And to revisit a point I keep making about our climate models becoming more inaccurate as we pass the cusp of stability (e.g. we go outside known previous interglacial maxima): https://twitter.com/KHayhoe/status/950487160884428801 A key term here is "long-term". What does long-term mean in this context? The authors clarify: "millennial time scales".
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:A key term here is "long-term". What does long-term mean in this context? The authors clarify: "millennial time scales". Yes and this is one of the reasons I'm also more concerned about things like ice sheet hydrofracture and gas hydrate stability zones than things like ocean anoxia. We can bake in the likelihood of an anoxic event over the 21st century but we also have more time to figure out how to unfuck ourselves for things like that. Uncertainty in things like hydrofracturing models results in large sea level rise uncertainty on decadal and centennial time scales.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
So we can totally build domed, self contained arcologys right.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:54
|
|
|
Shifty Nipples posted:Good thing the internet exists so that I can talk to and learn from people living all over the world without having to fly anywhere. But we're all on the same forums which is practically like being in the same town. If you really want to expand your mind and become a better person clearly you need to head to reddit and go to r/The_Donald or whatever the hell it is.
|
|
#
?
Jan 8, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
I for one would welcome and end to air-travel and a return to the golden age of Sail.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 00:46
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:
I would say that any answer that is "global permanent austerity" is dumb and unworkable. I think change and malleability in culture is near infinite and if we all change to eating yeast paste and mcdonalds serves fried maggots as long as they taste good people will go for it. If it tastes better than beef people will get over the yuck and forget they ever ate beef. If someone presents a workable alternative to airplanes that isn't just "hurr, sail a ship" and we are all taking suborbital rockets or transpacific hyperloops or something everyone will dump planes the day the better thing competes. If the answer is ever that the only solution is some global regression or stagnation of standards of living then that is an answer that humanity came with a death timer. My standard of living should be the standard everyone gets. Future people should get better, if that isn't possible maybe humans weren't possible in the long term, maybe that is sad, but this isn't a megaman level where you know the designer made sure there was a winnable path.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:16
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:My standard of living should be the standard everyone gets. Future people should get better, if that isn't possible maybe humans weren't possible in the long term. Thanks for making your position clear.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:27
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I would say that any answer that is "global permanent austerity" is dumb and unworkable. Avoiding CO2-intensive process until the CO2-intensiveness of them goes down is not a "permanent" change. It's a mitigation strategy. This is why my argument is not "stop flying forever" it's "stop flying until planes aren't driven by fossil fuel combustion." You seem to exist in this fairytale world where solutions are instantaneous.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:If the answer is ever that the only solution is some global regression or stagnation of standards of living then that is an answer that humanity came with a death timer. My standard of living should be the standard everyone gets. Future people should get better, if that isn't possible maybe humans weren't possible in the long term, maybe that is sad, but this isn't a megaman level where you know the designer made sure there was a winnable path. So you're arguing we're better off dead than living worse lives. You have a lot more in common with the nihilistic hedonists than I thought.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:38
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:If the answer is ever that the only solution is some global regression or stagnation of standards of living then that is an answer that humanity came with a death timer. Ahhh a new climate doomsayer is born because they just can't stomach the thought of minimizing their output for a little while.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:15 |
|
|
Liberalism is a loving cancer
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2018 01:40
|
|