Instead it's "What are the chances my kid – the individual – will lead a relatively peaceful, fulfilling life for the next 70-90 years?"
I don't know the answer.
Did your parents know the answer to that? Did your grandparents? Etc
What gives you fulfillment varies based on perspective. Peace is fragile and basically non-existent across one's entire lifespan.
No. But it's not really relevant to me.
My grandparents' generation was largely motivated by religious faith (and lack of birth control) to have a bunch of kids.
My parents' generation mostly lost the religious motivation, but inherited the inertia without questioning it. It's not to say they didn't want their kids, but having kids was just "what you did".
None of that's the case for me.
But if I had a kid and e.g., watched that kid become a climate refugee, I think I'd regret my decision to make that kid.
If you think climate change is a good reason to not have children you need to stop and reexamine how the media/doomscrolling have affected your thought process.
I see this reason given time and time again and I just don't understand it. We're currently living in what's probably the best time ever to be a human. We get to live in air conditioned houses, many medical issues have been all but eradicated, we have (for the first time ever) too much food, etc.
Otherwise if it's just an excuse - you don't need one to not have children. If you just want to maintain your current lifestyle that's up to you.
No need. Except for Hacker News and local news, I don't read the news. I don't use other social networks except for a few small non-news subreddits and Github.
But my local environment is changing year over year, and it's concerning.
> We get to live in air conditioned houses
It's funny that you mention that. Air conditioners were almost unheard of where I live. But now we're regularly hitting 40C+ in the summer for long stretches and people locally are installing them. It wasn't like that 15 years ago.
To flip your advice on its head, maybe turn off the air conditioning and experience the change firsthand.
I guarantee my 2 year old daughter will be just fine in regards to global warming. Some areas of the world might have issues, but if you're in a rich country like America you don't really need to worry about it on a personally-affecting-me-level.
Like?
I tend to agree that humanity will eventually overcome but the question is also when and at what cost?
Statistically someone was going to survive, you're lucky it was your ancestors, but it doesn't mean you will be lucky again.
Do you have any genuine studies that show such impactful effects?
I'd almost bet money on the eventual use of stratospheric sulfide injection to cool the planet. It's cheap enough that even a third world country could conceivably pay for it. We have no idea what the side effects will be, but it may well be worth the risk to avoid 3-4c of warming.
The amount of arable land that will be lost in the tropics is going to dramatically impact all countries around the Equator. Some areas simply will not support human life without air conditioning with a 2 degree increase in wet bulb temperature and +3C increase in extreme weather events.
Crop failures are linked to many historically extreme events. A 15%-30% in staple foods has _massive_ impacts in the poorest 20% of the population. In poor democracies it leads to people voting for demagogues and autocrats; in other places it's much worse.
The cascade of these events with ever increasing temperature is exponential.
Some crops like coffee, chocolate and grapes are going to see an extremely dramatic reduction in arable surface
The higher price for food will cause millions of deaths, an impact comparable to COVID or to the Ukraine and Ethiopian wars combined. It will pale in comparison to the impact of WW2, the black plague or the Chinese cultural revolution.
I like my phrasing "millions will die". That works on numerate people, but most people can't really conceptualize the difference between a million and a billion. Any other suggestions?