|
In terms of raw impact Thing Lessons is mostly right in that if you don't get policy changes nothing else really matters. The best personal thing you can do is to be a force multiplier by canvassing for candidates and policies that will bring sustainable change. As I mentioned before, living a carbon-restricted lifestyle lets you see what sort of policies matter. It also fuckin owns and you'll be in much better physical shape.
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
The best personal thing you can do is be a much more prolific, strategic, and less mentally ill version of Ted Kaczynski and start offing the .01% until they poo poo the bed when it creaks in the night. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 05:38
|
|
|
I had a smart meter fitted today, I was pretty happy looking at it & it was about 80p of electric used over about 4 hours..... I thought not bad considering all the crap the kids have running. Then I found the Co2 used bit.... apparently those 4 hours produced 2.19Kg of Co2... that took the smile off my face a bit. we are so hosed if we carry on like this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 15:49
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:3 - 5 times more important (if you assume knock-on effects in transpo and hvac) Thank you. I have seen other studies that place Animal Agriculture (including the deforestation) at a level equal to or greater than all transportation. http://www.fao.org/docrep/010/a0701e/a0701e00.HTM FWIW, I rely on a bicycle for all my transportation during the week. Commute by train from San Diego to LA on Monday and back on Friday. (lucky to have a good job at 61).
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
Rime posted:The best personal thing you can do is be a much more prolific, strategic, and less mentally ill version of Ted Kaczynski and start offing the .01% until they poo poo the bed when it creaks in the night. lol Yes, they totally don't have security details  Trainee PornStar posted:I had a smart meter fitted today, I was pretty happy looking at it & it was about 80p of electric used over about 4 hours..... I thought not bad considering all the crap the kids have running. Haha if you think that's a lot, an airplane trip is on the order of .15 kg PER person PER mile, so flying for 4 hours means each person on the plane is responsible for about 240 kg
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 17:11
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:lol Security details or not, it's your best bet probably.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:lol I do think its a lot. I try to live as eco friendly as I can i.e. public transport, dont fly, eat minimal amounts of meat & only use a car now & then.... etc.. even then it's just a piss in the ocean  That stat you've posted is frightening...
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:Haha if you think that's a lot, an airplane trip is on the order of .15 kg PER person PER mile, so flying for 4 hours means each person on the plane is responsible for about 240 kg Less than twice what a tv cable box uses in a year!
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 18:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Less than twice what a tv cable box uses in a year! Only because your TV cable box also includes an ice-making machine and has to be refilled with coal every two weeks in order to function. Anyways, trolling aside, I'm starting to get a feeling that global warming is still a couple moves ahead of us again. Latest evidence: a nuclear reactor in France had to be shut down temporarily yesterday and production had to be reduced in two other plants because their coolant water was getting too warm to be released in the neighboring river Rhône without threatening the temperature balance of the river. Eight of our plants are now identified as located in a "sensitive location". Also: our trains are being slowed down because the rails are too hot and could break due to the heat. If this gets worse, some lines might have to be shut down temporarily.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Anyways, trolling aside, I'm starting to get a feeling that global warming is still a couple moves ahead of us again. Latest evidence: a nuclear reactor in France had to be shut down temporarily yesterday and production had to be reduced in two other plants because their coolant water was getting too warm to be released in the neighboring river Rhône without threatening the temperature balance of the river. Eight of our plants are now identified as located in a "sensitive location". Yeah this is really what the experience is going to be like more and more. Our rate of adaptation has been slower than the rate of change and this gap will keep getting wider until we decarbonize. Our infrastructure is just not at all ready for what's coming mid century and we're basically already out of time to adapt on the scale we need.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 19:52
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Only because your TV cable box also includes an ice-making machine and has to be refilled with coal every two weeks in order to function. Nope, it's a real thing: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-power-hog-20140617-story.html It turns out your carbon footprint is mostly stuff that uses a medium-low amount of power constantly, your cable box might only use 30 watts but it uses it 24/7 all day every day and that adds up far more carbon than something big you do rarely. It's the same as blaming poor people for owning nice shoes, no matter how much their shoes cost it's never going to be a significant amount of their income, it's irrelevant. A small number of luxury items never add up to day in day out spending. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/08/science/just-how-much-power-do-your-electronics-use-when-they-are-off.html quote:My cable box drew 28 watts when it was on and recording a show, and 26W when it was off and not recording anything. Even if I never watched TV, I would still consume about 227 kilowatt-hours annually. To put it in context, that’s more than the average person uses in an entire year in some developing countries, including Kenya and Cambodia, according to World Bank estimates.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:It turns out your carbon footprint is mostly stuff that uses a medium-low amount of power constantly You're an incredibly stupid person.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 20:13
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Anyways, trolling aside, I'm starting to get a feeling that global warming is still a couple moves ahead of us again. Latest evidence: a nuclear reactor in France had to be shut down temporarily yesterday and production had to be reduced in two other plants because their coolant water was getting too warm to be released in the neighboring river Rhône without threatening the temperature balance of the river. Eight of our plants are now identified as located in a "sensitive location". Same sorts of effects are highly constricting water releases for hydro power. Water temperature and flow requirements combined with shifting rainfall patterns and consumption are causing operators to have to forgo power generation to meet other needs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 20:19
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:You're an incredibly stupid person. That sure looks like a graph where the biggest factors are stuff people do daily. Not small numbers of rare stuff that is individually bad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 20:20
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That sure looks like a graph where the biggest factors are stuff people do daily. Not small numbers of rare stuff that is individually bad. You are very talented at cognitive dissonance. It seems to be an effective coping mechanism for you. Keep up the good work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 21:10
|
|
|
Also that whole post assumes that you live in an area where most of your power comes from fossil fuels. In Ontario, we phased out our last coal powerplant several years ago and now get most of our power from hydro and nuclear. I assume in quite a few non-US places it's a similar situation so individual choices like transport and living still have a larger impact.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 21:16
|
|
|
Segue posted:Also that whole post assumes that you live in an area where most of your power comes from fossil fuels. In Ontario, we phased out our last coal powerplant several years ago and now get most of our power from hydro and nuclear. Ontario has lots of problems but there has indeed been significant progress reducing CO2 emissions over the past couple of decades:  Of course those nuclear plants are getting pretty old and it will be interesting to see how they're replaced. In writing this post I realized that it's now Doug Ford's govt implementing Ontario's long-term energy plan and I felt a little hope drain away.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 21:49
|
|
|
I watched some vids about some old guy talking about his lifework of Holistic Management to revive grasslands/soil and reverse desertification. Legit or not?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
If it's that one TED talks episode, it's been brought up in the thread before, but it's been so long I can't remember if it was debunked or not
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
Polio Vax Scene posted:If it's that one TED talks episode, it's been brought up in the thread before, but it's been so long I can't remember if it was debunked or not Yes, that is the one. He seemed to know what he was talking about and seemed to have some good results, but I'm not entirely convinced.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 22:31
|
|
|
Gortarius posted:I watched some vids about some old guy talking about his lifework of Holistic Management to revive grasslands/soil and reverse desertification. This? https://kisstheground.com
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 23:06
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Nope, it's a real thing: http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-power-hog-20140617-story.html Ya but it's so much easier to simply cut out air travel when compared to getting a nuclear power plant built in replacement of a coal plant in the age of Trump.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 23:25
|
|
|
Notorious R.I.M. posted:You're an incredibly stupid person. you really don't want to move huh
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Ya but it's so much easier to simply cut out air travel when compared to getting a nuclear power plant built in replacement of a coal plant in the age of Trump. And that gets you a what percent decrease exactly?
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
Greater than zero, you disingenuous jackass. Decarbonization is going to come as an aggregate of multiple reductions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 3, 2018 23:57
|
|
|
Hello Sailor posted:Greater than zero, you disingenuous jackass. Decarbonization is going to come as an aggregate of multiple reductions. How many of that scale?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:And that gets you a what percent decrease exactly? Owlofcreamcheese posted:Less than twice what a tv cable box uses in a year! And that’s just for one single 4-hour flight avoided!
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 00:11
|
|
|
Although to be honest, simply evacuating the entire South as well as everything west of Omaha and east of Reno would probably do wonders for America’s power consumption given that all these areas are actually improper for human habitation and if there’s one thing that chugs power it’s AC.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 00:18
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:you really don't want to move huh if you want to pay for me to move out of my semi-rural apartment and into a city where i can avoid having a car, please, please PLEASE do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 00:59
|
|
|
ah yes the "gently caress you pay me" school of solidarity edit: v lol "shaming". the universal "i don't like being told bad news" reaction. StabbinHobo fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Aug 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 03:30
|
|
|
No, I mean my wife and I live in poverty, so gently caress off with your shaming stuff
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 06:43
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:And that’s just for one single 4-hour flight avoided! Yeah, my favorite thing here is OOCC trying to say that international flights don't matter by arguing that a single, short trip on a plane products an equivalent amount of CO2 to half a year of consumption from an always-on device. I also find it amusing that he's arguing against individual action as a way to justify recreational flying when any kind of sensible regulatory action would include forcing airlines to price in their CO2 cost thus moving that kind of trip completely out of reach of the average person.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 14:51
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:ah yes the "gently caress you pay me" school of solidarity Ah yes, the "blame people with no power for problems caused by people with power throughout several generations" school of solidarity. What a great way to inspire activism and win allies. StabbinHobo, your posts weigh like a nightmare on the brains of the living. Seven pages of worthless shitposts is enough, you may leave now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 15:37
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Oh word? There are previously undiscovered but kindasorta predicted feedback mechanisms that naturally exacerbate emissions when warming happens? Well poo poo. I'm sorry, but this is radically untrue. You don't know what you're talking about and you should stop spreading misinformation. You're quoting a post that cites three studies, one about soil respiration, another about carbon (CH4) from plastics, and another about carbon emissions from thawing Arctic permafrost. The only one that quantifies the level of emissions is the permafrost survey, which estimates 47-57 GtC under either a 1.5C or a 2.0C scenario. This is a significant amount of carbon, but it is dwarfed by anthropogenic emissions from the burning of fossil fuels. It's relevant for the carbon budget, (i.e., the amount we can emit and still stay "well below" 2.0C), but it is less than 10% of historical carbon emissions and about 5 years worth of emissions at current rates. As for the other two, they're not quantified at all, but likely to be quite low and ultimately irrelevant to atmospheric carbon content. You're incorrect. There is no indication that there are strong hidden feedback mechanisms that will multiply fossil fuel emissions. The problem is the carbon we are putting into the atmosphere, not hypothetical future emissions from a fantasy Earth that is somehow programmed to spew carbon with increasing temperatures.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 16:19
|
|
|
Paradoxish posted:Yeah, my favorite thing here is OOCC trying to say that international flights don't matter by arguing that a single, short trip on a plane products an equivalent amount of CO2 to half a year of consumption from an always-on device. I also find it amusing that he's arguing against individual action as a way to justify recreational flying when any kind of sensible regulatory action would include forcing airlines to price in their CO2 cost thus moving that kind of trip completely out of reach of the average person. If your carbon pricing scheme is going to put air travel "completely out of reach of the average person" it's going to also put electricity, heating and air conditioning out of reach, and you might as well just throw it in the trash. Saying it's unrealistic is giving it too much credit.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 16:23
|
|
|
You really wouldn't have to hike prices much on flights to make the average person reconsider flying altogether.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
The economies of scale would increase them further. Everyone needs electricity, not everyone needs recreational transoceanic flying.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 17:08
|
|
|
Conspiratiorist posted:The economies of scale would increase them further. Everyone needs electricity, not everyone needs recreational transoceanic flying. You absolutely do not know what an economy of scale is. Why use terms you don't understand? Just to seem smarter than you are?
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 17:12
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:You absolutely do not know what an economy of scale is. Why use terms you don't understand? Just to seem smarter than you are? The current demand for civilian flights permits a certain level of size for the aerospace industry that carries a proportional reduction in overhead costs for production and maintenance. This is economy of scale. But if less people fly, then less planes fly, then less planes are produced and maintained, eliminating those systemic overhead savings, thus contributing to increased flying costs over the direct proportional effect of a carbon tax.
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 17:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 04:43 |
|
|
im gay (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Aug 4, 2018 18:38
|
|
