|
enraged_camel posted:http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/07/antarctica-sea-level-rise-climate-change/ Look at the plus side, though: it would open up new areas for fossil fuel exploration!
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 05:44 |
|
|
Fansy posted:Climate departure: when mean local temperature exceeds historical highs. Yeah the Nature article is especially terrifying because it provides a map of areas where potentially deadly temperatures might be encountered regularly  First one is with +1°C Second one is with +3,7°C That's potentially 74% of worldwide population exposed to potentially deadly heat.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
TildeATH posted:Indonesia is uninhabitable at 3.7C? These temperatures are not immediately deadly, they just tend to cause significant excess deaths. Much like how 70 000 excess people died during the 2003 heat wave in Europe. Not everyone died.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I'm personally hoping for an incredibly contagious and staggeringly deadly pandemic that can only be cured through extremely expensive or otherwise limited therapy. It sounds like you're jonesing for some good ol' fashioned white supremacy!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 21:40
|
|
|
davebo posted:I guess I can justify it kind of like eating meat. It's horrible for the environment so I make efforts to eat less meat than most people, but I still eat some because why should I have to bear 100% of the Earth's burden myself? I'd rather we abandon freedom and just start sterilizing people after having one kid than for me to voluntarily not have any. What a weird post. Not eating meat or not having children is certainly not bearing 100% of the Earth's burden yourself. It's merely doing a part of your part by not actively making certain things worse.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
Having children is morally bad in general because it is subjecting a conscious being to the horrors and sufferings of life, all this without asking them for prior consent. Having children in this day and age is specifically morally bad because lol what kind of a monster are you
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:In real life the only actual thing that has ever worked to fix environmental problems is raising people's standards of living and giving people more freedom. In which case the have less kids, gravitate towards cleaner technologies and are able to develop and implement permanent changes to lifestyle that aren't just eternal austerity programs. It seems that, so far, raising people's standards of living worldwide hasn't resulted in a significant curbing of worldwide GHG emissions at all, which is the main environmental problem we're facing today.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2018 18:05
|
|
|
Tourism isn’t a goddamn right, it’s an indulgence of the rich
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 08:43
|
|
|
It's pretty stunning to see how so many posters ITT have made theirs the classic George H. W. Bush line - the American way of life is not up for negotiation. Period.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 09:43
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Try the Chinese way of life buddy. They already emit more carbon than the US and all of Europe combined and are higher per capita than the EU. Even if you could somehow, miraculously, convince the Americans to go back to living in shacks and tilling the glebe, it would make no difference. They'd make up the deficit in about ten years at current growth rates. Lol if you think that the Chinese way of life is what drives most Chinese carbon emissions.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 10:10
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:What does that mean? Presumably, that you believe Chinese carbon emissions are driven by goods exported to the West. Well, you're wrong. Chinese exports are responsible for, at best, 17% of its emissions. Not enough to change the calculus significantly. You're not even doing the smart versions of this. I listen to Kevin Anderson, who propounds this moralistic, anti-consumption doctrine, and even he admits there are a whole lot of people in China who are "consuming too much" by the standards you want to use. Git gud. Of course it changes the calculus if you factor these outsourced emissions back into the Western emission total. And your deflection doesn't change poo poo: the American and the Western way of life is absolutely going to have to change, whether it is in a voluntary, planned and proactive manner or in the face of yet more severe capitalist and ecological crises. None of this is to say that the Chinese ought not to keep their consumption in check as well of course. Thug Lessons posted:Your myopic and reactionary ideology will accomplish nothing. You cannot save the world, because you misidentify its problems and offer no solutions. You cannot end it, because your deluded fantasies of collapse are built on sand. You can just make the world a little worse. You can promulgate an atmosphere of depression and tilt against the windmills of nuclear power and GMOs, forestalling decarbonization and burgeoning agricultural yields. You can make people guilty about eating at McDonalds and maybe, if you're extremely lucky, get glyphosate banned, thus removing one of the least toxic herbicides from the market for the sin of being made by Monsanto. But affect history? That's something you'll never do. Your foremost intellectuals will, at best, be remembered as anachronistic curiosities like Oswald Spengler and Arthur Toynbee: eccentrics who believed in an impending collapse, created a lot of sound and fury around that concept and, in the end, signified nothing. More likely they'll be forgotten. I'm afraid that it is you who is making the world worse.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 12:22
|
|
|
Yeah, there's nothing I can do about it except complain, and there's nothing you can do about it except cheerlead, that's true. I suppose our collective destiny rests within the hands of Xi, then. Hopefully he'll turn out to be one of the wiser autocrats who have ruled the world. Still doesn't change the fact that I'd also like the West to reevaluate its way of life too.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 12:54
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:85% of americans have been on a plane, the use of planes is a basic thing that everyone that has them available utilizes. Owlofcreamcheese posted:I bet you have been on a plane yourself, but you tell yourself it doesn't count because it was for something important to you and not something important to me and that you feel very bad so it's okay when you did it, because the goal isn't to find real solutions, it's to feel smug, and you have decided you felt the right way when you flew so your okay but I enjoyed it when i flew so it's sinful even if the earth isn't gonna care how the carbon we release FEeeLS, and the only solution is to find a way both of us can do what we did while releasing less carbon.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 13:04
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Wouldn't it be more reasonable to hope they'd reduce their carbon emissions, which is possible, rather than expecting them to change their lifestyle (i.e. get poorer) which isn't going to happen and wouldn't make a difference anyway? I don't get the "change their lifestyles = get poorer" thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 13:07
|
|
|
I haven't been everywhere I want to go to. I absolutely want to go to America in 2024 for the total eclipse. I really want to go to *insert paradisiac destination here* on vacation. I really really loving love meat. I'm not renouncing any of these things for forgiveness, though. I do it out of ideology, because I strive to live in accordance with my morals, and my morals and my ideology dictate that I should not be so wasteful as to ride on a plane for three weeks' worth of distraction. That's all. You really should imitate me, Owl Of Cream Cheese. Temper your passions with reason. Take the bus and go take pictures of cats in a neighboring city, you'll find it infinitely satisfying.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 13:31
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think everyone defines poverty by being able to consume less products and services. That is pretty much the actual definition of poverty. I think you'll find that official definitions of poverty are actually based on not being able to afford a certain amount of goods and services. I don't believe depriving someone from access to a luxury is making them poor. In order to get poorer, you have to already be poor.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 13:38
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:But you still say you took planes. With all the moral superiority you didn’t even manage to not use planes, just later decide you felt bad and that you wouldn’t watch an eclipse. Yep. I grew up and started adhering to a coherent ideology and then started living by it. I am a better person for it now. You really should give austerity a try. It's literally as easy as deciding you're not going to go watch an eclipse even though it would be really cool.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 14:07
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:I doubt you've really tried it. The most energy-intensive appliance you're likely to have in your home is a washing machine + dryer. Do you really wash your clothes by hand? Doubt it. Environmentalists focus on big-ticket items like international flights but carbon emissions are mostly driven by everyday energy expenditures. Don't you worry about my kWh consumption, I live in France. And I don't have a dryer. Owlofcreamcheese posted:Maybe you should try going to look at an eclipse if you like eclipses instead of thinking you will be somehow rewarded for individual personal self denial. There is going to be absolutely no amount of environmental problems solved by people self denying themselves eclipses. If someone invented a wing that saved like .0001% of the fuel that would release a thousand times less carbon by the end of a single day than you will ever in your entire life "save" by some weird staying home from eclipses self sacrifice. None of your personal tiny consumer choices are going to matter at all to the environment unless you have some realistic plan to get a million other people to follow them too. Fixing the actual problems is the only actual solution. Of course my CO2 emissions are meaningless in the face of humanity's emissions, but so is my personal pleasure. The harm I'd do would be literally microscopic, but the value of the 180 seconds of pleasure I'll derive from it is even more laughable. Thank you for the picture, though. I never said I was going to be "rewarded" for anything. I never called my actions (or lack thereof) a sacrifice. I don't believe renouncing transcontinental travel for leisure purposes to be a sacrifice. It is actually extremely easy. You should give it a try.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:okay, but if you know that the thing you are doing is not actual environmentalism why do it? Why waste time doing fake and useless distraction mock versions of environmentalism instead of figuring out a way to work on real environmentalism in some way? Being someone that actually cares then expending all your energy into fake dead ends where you somehow pretend you save the planet by not watching eclipses you wanted to see seems like the worst possible angle. Not doing all the stuff I'm not doing is not "saving the planet" and I've never pretended that it is. It is merely "not making the situation worse". It's not good, it's merely not bad. It's also not a waste of time or energy, because it doesn't cost me any of my time or energy. Harm reduction is definitely one component of environmentalism, though. It's one side of the coin, the other side being advocating for and working towards solutions to the issues surrounding the environment. My way of doing that is mostly through political activism in support of politicians and parties that advocate for huge national investments in renewable technology, collective transportation, improved land use, aquaculture, social and economic justice, and international cooperation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 15:10
|
|
|
I’m not making a show of anything, Owl Of Cream Cheese, I’m merely telling you about my life because you prompted me about it. I know it’s nothing. It’s nothing to me at least. It takes zero effort on my part and I wouldn’t say I focus on it. That’s why I find you bristling at me for not doing anything frankly baffling. Why are you so angry that I’m not going to the US and living like you?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 16:02
|
|
|
Is it because I, unlike you, have overcome my childish stage of growing unbearably frustrated when I don’t do something I would have liked to do? You don’t have to be a slave to your every whim, Owl Of Cream Cheese. You can realize that some things you want to do are extremely wasteful and your life wouldn’t actually be worse if you didn’t do them. Go get high and watch a compilation of eclipse pics set to vaporwave on Youtube instead.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 16:11
|
|
|
I cannot find anyone in this thread saying that individual initiatives to reduce one’s individual carbon footprint are "the solution". In fact, I can quote posts of mine on this very page that contradict this idea. I think you are confusing me with someone who lives entirely in your head. I hope that one day, you understand that you don’t actually need to live like you do, and that your life won’t be worse if you don’t. In the meantime, enjoy your transcontinental cat petting.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2018 17:17
|
|
|
I still don’t get why Owl Of Cream Cheese keeps on posting stuff about how him moderating his air travel consumption is meaningless when compared to improvements in engine efficiency when improvements in engine efficiency are the most basic example of the Jevons paradox
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Anyway in a couple of years I plan to be posting pictures of Chinese cats taken after a cool ride on the Transsiberian.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 22:39
|
|
|
This cat has got some rocking haunches Edit @davebo yeah but the cats in your home state probably don’t have a well-formed opinion on Liu Shaoqi tho
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2018 22:51
|
|
|
Minge Binge posted:Death
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2018 16:38
|
|
|
Arkane posted:I agree that Trump shows that populism can hijack a democracy and that when things like this happen, democracy declines....but I think it's sort of masking the more important point that the trajectory of the world is bending, in fits and starts, towards more freedom and better outcomes. Man, I remember the last time Europe self-corrected out of fascism. It took a decade or so, but oh boy, what a wild decade that was!
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2018 17:35
|
|
|
1) Ban all cash transactions. 2) Associate every credit/debit card to a SSN or a company registration number. 3) Mandate all companies to send a detailed record of every transaction made by every individual to the IRS. 4) Develop an algorithm that translates this into a carbon score per person per year, based on the carbon intensivity of the goods/services they bought. 5) Use this carbon score as the basis for a progressive carbon tax with brackets. Its rate is harsher for businesses than for people. 6) (maybe?) Every year there is a lottery of sorts where a bunch of names are drawn out at random, where the probability of being drawn is a function of your carbon score. The selected people then fight to the death in a high-tech arena and the winner is named Carbon Lord
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2018 07:42
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Don't need to ban cash transactions. The lack of transfer of carbon footprint in a seller's ongoing ledger would be motive enough for them to try to use recorded transactions. This is a great idea! An alternative could also be to set up a system wherein buyers would have to be identified by their ID/SSN before they can pay cash for anything.
|
|
#
¿
May 19, 2018 16:36
|
|
|
The Devil needs no advocate, Trump lover.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2018 11:34
|
|
|
Thank god people tend not to think as economists do. That’d make for a hosed up society!
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2018 20:48
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:Oh poo poo, really?! The Southern Poverty Law Center? Great avatar-post combo!
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Where do these guys keep coming from anyway, lmao
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2018 23:31
|
|
|
RealTalk posted:I'll come right out and say that I consider myself an anarchist. You are not. Don't be insulting.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2018 00:05
|
|
|
What if we all simultaneously let out a huge fart? That’s probably not 40 000 GtC, but close enough imo. EDIT I’m talking real huge farts
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2018 14:22
|
|
|
spf3million posted:I like the idea of some sort of trade organization that requires certain emissions reductions targets to gain admittance. Countries not complying with the targets would be left on the outside and be forced to pay tariffs on goods exported to the member countries. I know next to nothing about world trade but isn't that sort of what the WTO does except for the rules are regarding certain equal business practices and other fairness and possibly human rights agreements? The WTO is mostly all about removing barriers to trade so it would be out of character for it to advocate for higher tariffs. They tolerate anti-dumping and countervailing duties because they protect businesses, but a paradigm change would be required to get them to tolerate additional duties based on ecological concerns. I mean, hell, they don’t care about labor standards, why would they care about carbon emissions?
|
|
#
¿
May 24, 2018 09:52
|
|
|
tsa posted:Because we aren't even in the same universe as that happening look at the loving graphs dumbass. All the instances of increases in standards of living prior to industrialization? idk
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
US energy markets probably require massive amounts of government intervention but not like this
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2018 16:30
|
|
|
Life on this planet has only been asinine for a few thousand years, though. Before that, it was merely equine, and only for 50 million years or so.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2018 10:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 05:44 |
|
|
*In a jocular tone that suggests sarcasm, but you can't help but feel there's a kernel of honesty in there* Ecoterrorism is also probably an effective individual form of action Speaking of which, if anyone is interested in a good and odd movie about ecoterrorism, check out Woman at War https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFxz4oNfBV0 Learn how to bring down electricity pylons!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2018 23:07
|
|