|
Monaghan posted:It'd be nice if it actually managed to stay on budget. Budget isn't the problem, not really. The US has spent over a trillion dollars over 30 years on a plane that cannot even fly. We just don't care.
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Since I'm using france as the example of climate techno utopia so much lets look at how france got there: the president said 'hey, lets switch to nuclear power", then they switched to nuclear power within a few years. that it. that was the whole thing. ( not every country is going to have it go that smooth, but it really is a perfect example of the denier's claim it is inherently a 250 year process that is sci-fi to even think about and couldn't be any other way) 1. France's per-capita emissions are still far, far too high to deal with global warming. 2. France's capacity factor of their nuclear reactors is also pretty garbage, IIRC it's mid 70s-80s, and they hit the 60s with theirs, due to poor planning. This is insufficient, and it's not doable in a 10 year period by your own admission. So again, give me a 10 year plan here that isn't an obvious failure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
edit: argh no, bed time
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
Here's my problem with the plane thing: the empty seat, assuming nobody else books it, will result in just as many emissions as had you been on the plane. Until enough people cut out taking that specific route that the airline gets rid of the flight entirely and instead of four daily flights from tulsa to chicago they run three, no difference is achieved. Too many people currently rely on air travel for work or seeing families on holidays for a handfull of people cutting out leisure travel to make a difference. Personal water and power conservation make a lot more sense to me, because those things have a direct impact on the pool of availible resources.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 05:15
|
|
|
The Dipshit posted:1. France's per-capita emissions are still far, far too high to deal with global warming. random pages I'm seeing say 3 tons per capita is the line for sustainable. Countries above 4.5 now dropping to that would put the global per capita well below that with ample room for poorer countries to modernize. Eyeballing the math even just the US and china hitting france levels would get us around 3 tons per capita globally. Again, with no particular reason to think of france as anything particularly special where they hyper optimized anything to any sort of hard line limit in this regard. quote:This is insufficient, and it's not doable in a 10 year period by your own admission. So again, give me a 10 year plan here that isn't an obvious failure. you picked ten years thinking you had picked a number that was impossible then when I pointed out that the country I'd been using as an example literally did it in 14 you are gonna play that as some huge gotcha because it wasn't exactly the arbitrary number you made up out of literally no where?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 05:19
|
|
|
Blanketspace posted:Here's my problem with the plane thing: the empty seat, assuming nobody else books it, will result in just as many emissions as had you been on the plane. Until enough people cut out taking that specific route that the airline gets rid of the flight entirely and instead of four daily flights from tulsa to chicago they run three, no difference is achieved. Too many people currently rely on air travel for work or seeing families on holidays for a handfull of people cutting out leisure travel to make a difference. If there are too many empty seats airlines will cut down on flights so the planes are more full.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 05:21
|
|
|
So what will be the next disruption that jolts everybody into a great panic a la a world war z?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 06:26
|
|
|
capitalism 101 here
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
qkkl posted:If there are too many empty seats airlines will cut down on flights so the planes are more full. I mentioned that!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 06:52
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:That is probably true. People in france/italy/spain where people have per capita emissions of 4-6 tons instead of american's 17-20 live their lifestyles differently, but like, generally comparable western lifestyles to the US/south korea/canada. There is no ecofascism or loss of freedoms or extreme deprivation. Just reasonable non-extreme variations on society. I am French. I know my country and I know yours. My country isn’t just a bunch of statistics about efficiency and neither is yours. Listen to me, American! Stop talking about my loving country as an example if you aren’t ready to live like my loving country.wo.men. The difference between you Americans’ per capita emissions is not merely structural or infrastructural. Switching your power plants to nuclear wouldn’t be enough, by far. You want to get on our level? You consume far more power than we do. You consume far more travel than we do. You consume and waste far more food and far more water than we do. Look at my lifestyle, American! Can you really call that austerity? Utter bullshit. Most of my country.wo.men and I live a comfortable life, and those of us who don’t could if my country actually redistributed wealth as it ought to. And now look at your lifestyle. And look at how you, a self-professed liberal, are willing to defend tooth-and-nail, even more emphatically than George W. loving Bush, the wasteful and decadent American Way Of Life. Do you understand now? I’m not telling you to live in mud huts, no one does, no one’s telling you to undergo extreme deprivation, everything we’re telling you to do is actually extremely mundane and easy. "Live like a European" is literally what we’re telling you to do. Stop equating the adoption of a European lifestyle with horrid privation, start taking the measure of your own consumption and emissions, work to limit them and start agitating in your society and your political party for lifestyle changes for all Americans. God.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 07:05
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:I am French. I know my country and I know yours. My country isn’t just a bunch of statistics about efficiency and neither is yours. Not gonna work. Even if America followed your example. Living like a European (eww) wouldn't be enough. We can't just give up huge cars, burning fossil fuels constantly,etc. We have to go back to the 1700s, at least. We're probably going to back to the bronze age by next century. Electricity, gone. Plumbing gone. Water sanitation, gone. Oil, gone. Coal, gone. Natural gas,gone. If you have kids, teach them to be strong and self reliant. Teach them how to survive. Teach them to be tough, in case they have to defend themselves from raiders or slavers. Or In case they become raiders and slavers themselves. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:I am French. I know my country and I know yours. My country isn’t just a bunch of statistics about efficiency and neither is yours. A good start might be talking to one's local government and pushing them to develop viable options for public transportation. 45% of americans have no access to public transportation, and what they do have is generally pretty garbage. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy The L. A. line's destruction cut off something like eight suburbs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 07:18
|
|
|
Kids entering school now will be at university in 2036-2040. So that's when stuff will definitely be going down right? Surely parents today can see that, if they won't make it until climate change affects everybody badly, their kids will be in the middle of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 07:20
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:no one’s telling you to undergo extreme deprivation, everything we’re telling you to do is actually extremely mundane and easy. Wait, what? You are agreeing with me, not arguing. I'm using france as an example of a place that has vastly vastly lower co2 output than the US but absolutely no lower standard of living.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 12:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:Wait, what? You are agreeing with me, not arguing. I'm using france as an example of a place that has vastly vastly lower co2 output than the US but absolutely no lower standard of living. And yet when challenged about your insanely wasteful consumption patterns you call adopting those of the French unbearable austerity, and reject the possibility of calling for and instilling broad cultural changes among the American population. Y’all have two and a half times as many airplane passengers carried per capita. Twice as many road passenger kilometers per capita. You consume twice as much oil in general, and twice as much electricity in general. One and a half times as much meat. Three times as much water. And I’m not cheating and using EU averages that are brought down by Poland, Greece, Hungary or even Spain, I’m using France, a very wasteful country with high consumption figures. This is not a purely infrastructural issue that can be solved through technology or progress, it is very much cultural and needs to be addressed at the political level by coaxing or enforcing cultural change, which necessarily passes through modifying individual patterns. And you’re actively arguing against that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 13:22
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:And yet when challenged about your insanely wasteful consumption patterns you call adopting those of the French unbearable austerity, What? I'm calling france an example of a first world country that produces 75% less carbon without any unbearable austerity at all. It's changes that are extremely attainable and do not lower their quality of life in any way and are not reliant on self denial.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 15:06
|
|
|
Blanketspace posted:Here's my problem with the plane thing: the empty seat, assuming nobody else books it, will result in just as many emissions as had you been on the plane. Until enough people cut out taking that specific route that the airline gets rid of the flight entirely and instead of four daily flights from tulsa to chicago they run three, no difference is achieved. Too many people currently rely on air travel for work or seeing families on holidays for a handfull of people cutting out leisure travel to make a difference. microecon is loving *tarot cards for liberals*, you just can't pull these random little anecdotal "well-actuallys" out of your rear end and "debate" them with each other to form "rational" conclusions. its pure loving sophistry. like catholics arguing about gods rules on masturbation, there's no "two sides" to the argument, there's just two people trying to make poo poo up faster than the other guy. here, watch: if we were to engage with this (which we should not), i could go: - margins work both ways but thats not even the good one, ready? - ever heard of standby? see? we can just throw more and more factoid hypotheticals into our ever expanding bullshit premises. you of course, if you wanted to continue with this sad charade, could escalate to some kind of jevons/induced-demand tack. around and around.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 15:42
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What? I'm calling france an example of a first world country that produces 75% less carbon without any unbearable austerity at all. It's changes that are extremely attainable and do not lower their quality of life in any way and are not reliant on self denial. Except that most Americans would view those changes as a massive drop in quality of life, which is the whole point. Flowers for Algeria already pointed this out, but French people drive less, they fly less, they eat less meat, they use less electricity, and despite that, they still emit too much.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 15:43
|
|
|
when the answer is just don't get on the loving plane
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:What? I'm calling france an example of a first world country that produces 75% less carbon without any unbearable austerity at all. It's changes that are extremely attainable and do not lower their quality of life in any way and are not reliant on self denial. You literally used the word "austerity" and "sacrifice" in this thread, several times, to reject the notion of not going on transcontinental vacation twice a year or reducing one’s meat intake. Puh-leeze.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:Kids entering school now will be at university in 2036-2040. So that's when stuff will definitely be going down right? Surely parents today can see that, if they won't make it until climate change affects everybody badly, their kids will be in the middle of it. Yeah. This coming Thanksgiving I think I'm going to have a very frank conversation with one of my sisters who has not yet had kids but really wants a few of them. The last time I saw her I made some comment on [awful_climate_change_news_of_the_day] and about how bad it would be for children born now, and she was really shocked. It wasn't even on her radar. I think I owe it to those kids to try and keep them from being born at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:13
|
|
|
StabbinHobo posted:when the answer is just don't get on the loving plane You don't get on the plane. I'm getting on the loving plane and doing something I enjoy before I die.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:15
|
|
|
How are u posted:You don't get on the plane. I'm getting on the loving plane and doing something I enjoy before I die. So.. in order you can live your life your going to advocate the next generation does not get born? How are u posted:I think I owe it to those kids to try and keep them from being born at all. I think your sister should probably stay away from you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:20
|
|
|
How are u posted:You don't get on the plane. I'm getting on the loving plane and doing something I enjoy before I die. Is there literally nothing else you’d enjoy instead? Maybe taking a Greyhound to visit a neighboring city, perhaps a two-day visit at your regional huge museum, a couple boardgames with your sister, a VR escape game with buddies, a Star Trek binge, a huuuge joint combined with a National Geographic documentary or a Bob Ross tutorial playlist, volunteering at the local chapter of the DSA, iunno, anything at all??
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Trainee PornStar posted:So.. in order you can live your life your going to advocate the next generation does not get born? he's right, though? e: at least in regards to "the best next generation is no next generation," flying/travel bores me Oxxidation fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Trainee PornStar posted:So.. in order you can live your life your going to advocate the next generation does not get born? I'm living my life one way or the other. If I were the next generation I would not want to be born. And, living my life doesn't mean pouring motor oil into the storm drain or voting for Republicans or any of the other dumb made-up straw men some of you mongoloids are projecting onto myself and oocc. Actually that "personal action is the avocado toast of climate change" is a great line and I will deffo remember it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:29
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Is there literally nothing else you’d enjoy instead? Maybe taking a Greyhound to visit a neighboring city, perhaps a two-day visit at your regional huge museum, a couple boardgames with your sister, a VR escape game with buddies, a Star Trek binge, a huuuge joint combined with a National Geographic documentary or a Bob Ross tutorial playlist, volunteering at the local chapter of the DSA, iunno, anything at all?? Years go by when I never leave the country, and I very much enjoy exploring regional sights and poo poo. I'm just not going to deny myself the opportunity when it does occur out of some really dumb sense of personal guilt or misguided delusion that my single action will make a difference. In the U.S. of A. the only single action you can make that will make a difference right now is your Vote.  sure thing, guy. you'll probably be voting for Le Pen in 20-30 years when the real climate refugees start rolling in.VVVVVVV How are u fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:33
|
|
|
Eh, with an attitude like that, in twenty years you’ll be voting for the next generation of Republicans and you’ll be the toxic and out-of-touch Old that your sister’s children will shut out of their life. Much like if you’d been born thirty years earlier you’d have voted for Reagan because how dare Carter tell me to put on a sweater *cranks heating to 26ºC* Edit it’s not about guilt, it’s about responsibility
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:34
|
|
|
How are u posted:I'm living my life one way or the other. If I were the next generation I would not want to be born. I wasn't trying to argue with you, I just wanted clarification of your position. There's a lot of 'ME' in what your saying... Maybe you wish you hadn't been born but it's unfair to project that onto the next generation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
How are u posted:You don't get on the plane. I'm getting on the loving plane and doing something I enjoy before I die. to be clear, as i've said repeatedly, i didn't say "never fly". I was responding to that person's bullshit econ-101 morality tale. the fact that you rarely fly but want to go on a few trips in your life is basically what I consider to be the reasonable choice. however your attitude about it... what the gently caress man. re-read what you wrote. it is just a different way of phrasing "gently caress you, I got mine". I don't know how old you are, but you sure as poo poo channeled some inner baby boomer there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:45
|
|
|
qkkl posted:... im depressed lol posted:Hello Mr. & Ms. Public, im depressed lol posted:it's a shame capitalism = my way= only way of life to most people. posts like this read in a psuedo-they-live-sunglasses fashion as: StabbinHobo posted:most of the "individual action is pointless" people are basically just human lab rats that have lost the will to live i guess just the act of recognizing the problem, writing it down and admitting i am basically littering in the air so i can have more time to write stupid posts like this is a start. maybe it will be enough to shame myself to... stop loving doing that. but most people aren't going to do this. and with how "bubbled" (ideological ghetto's?) social circles are becoming you/me and all your/our friends could shame/shun this type of behavior and get everyone we interact with to realize it.... but it won't make a dent in other groups. Blanketspace posted:Here's my problem with the plane thing: the empty seat, assuming nobody else books it, will result in just as many emissions as had you been on the plane. Until enough people cut out taking that specific route that the airline gets rid of the flight entirely and instead of four daily flights from tulsa to chicago they run three, no difference is achieved. Too many people currently rely on air travel for work or seeing families on holidays for a handfull of people cutting out leisure travel to make a difference. the big bullseye that you kind of zig-zag around is that there is an economic incentive to continue shoving as many people onto those planes as possible. the airline industry loses the ability to be accessible to the poor and will be less profitable if they don't have those planes in the air as much as possible. because the planes are an 'investment' and sunk-costs fallacy isn't powerful enough to dissuade you as environmental impact isn't a factor. and even if it were with some stupid carbon budget scheme, the carbon budget would be abandoned almost the instant it forces an industry to shutter. i hate carbon budget on principle as it simulates reality with something that is completely disconnected from it, and ends up informing policy decisions based upon the the simile. see Simulcara and Simulation. now, read the above again. this is the basic "economies of scale" microeconomics and the more i think about this issue, the more i go back to this hypothesis/nugget of a thought i've been jerking off about previously in this thread (my post history in this thread is mostly related to this), and how astoundingly pervasive this type of rationalization is in our society. * the rationalization i am referring to is looking at the natural world and applying strategies that only work in market-based, literally-defined economic systems like capitalism. we desperately need to somehow articulate how insane this is, and in a manner that is easy to understand. it's like collectively our civilization has some greed-induced mental illness and is incapable of diagnosing itself. and the only way out is some intense self-help. we can barely diagnose the problem, and then we have to solve it while still in this effective psychotic state. or the aliens/jesus save us from ourselves ultimately, the below post sums up how you should read this whole thread. unless someone can convince you otherwise. starkebn posted:If you take everything said on this gay dead forum seriously your brain is broken Edit: * removed a sentence fragment im depressed lol fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Oct 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:You literally used the word "austerity" and "sacrifice" in this thread, several times, to reject the notion of not going on transcontinental vacation twice a year or reducing one’s meat intake. Puh-leeze. I guess? I think you are agreeing with me more than fighting with me here. France is my example of a country that has much lower emissions without reduction of quality of life. Without asking for "sacrifices". Like french people eat less meat, but not because they eat sad slop in a dark room while crying. They eat really good food, and feed kids things other than sloppy joes at school, and have lunch breaks with time enough to do something other than microwave a hotpocket and there is places you can buy fresh bread without being a rich guy and like, even if you go to mcdonalds they will fry up a block of cheese and sell you that to eat instead of meat. Like it's not like they replaced meat with microchips and they eat sci-fi but it's the exact same thing as the nuclear power, they "replaced" it with a better set of "technology". Like if you offer an alternative that is as good (or nearly as good) or better everyone will just do that, if you offer worse alternatives then appeal to morality then lol, no way. Never.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
im depressed lol posted:it's like collectively our civilization has some greed-induced mental illness and is incapable of diagnosing itself. and the only way out is some intense self-help. we can barely diagnose the problem, and then we have to solve it while still in this effective psychotic state. or the aliens/jesus save us from ourselves humanity has always been like this, our species is fundamentally glitched we just hit a point of technological development where that glitch becomes fatal on a macro scale, is all pity about all the collateral damage
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 17:02
|
|
|
How are u posted:
Nah. I’ve got principles. At least principles that go further than "oh gee I swear I’d vote for someone who’d force me to do stuff I really don’t wanna do on my own"
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 17:03
|
|
|
How are u posted:Yeah. This coming Thanksgiving I think I'm going to have a very frank conversation with one of my sisters who has not yet had kids but really wants a few of them. The last time I saw her I made some comment on [awful_climate_change_news_of_the_day] and about how bad it would be for children born now, and she was really shocked. It wasn't even on her radar. Your sister can both have a large(ish) family and not make things worse. Foster! Adopt! it's a hell of an uphill climb, and has unique issues compared to your biological children, but it's something my wife and I have decide on doing. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3785900 is an excellent resource. Mocking Bird is a wonderful poster.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
By being as wasteful as possible now, I’m helping future generations by preventing overpopulation by depriving them of resources. Each steak I eat now is 10 people who starve to death before reproducing. Now that’s forward thinking!
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
What impact would basic income have? I guess getting rid of jobs that produce nothing (marketing, most of finance, entire industries) would cut down drastically on commutes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I'm gonna pet every cat on earth in randomly selected order before I die. Owns, thank you. Blanketspace posted:A good start might be talking to one's local government and pushing them to develop viable options for public transportation. 45% of americans have no access to public transportation, and what they do have is generally pretty garbage. If you're interested, here's a great article showing where we're at in terms of utilization. tl;dr: Use is only noteworthy in a handful of cities and college towns. Only NYC's transit ranks on an international scale (and subway accounts for 60%+ of trips). Article: How Your City’s Public Transit Stacks Up From: 538 Date: 2014 JUL 31 quote:...
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
Fly all you want, peeps, because worthless lives in the tropics are emitting more carbon than the entire EU, purely through their rampant and unstoppable deforestation efforts. But, y'know, your flight to visit your ailing aunt is the real crime here. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 07:40 |
|
|
Rime posted:worthless lives in the tropics Maybe you think you're being ironic, but it's despicable either way
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2018 21:19
|
|
