There are orders of magnitude more serious threats to the future of humanity than climate change, such a imminent war. In part due to resource shortages, like energy, which in part was caused by prioritising misguided policies inspired by those same ideas.
1) preserving at least some nature and biodiversity. Not much elaboration needed, we are causing a mass-extinction, some would like to limit the impact of that. And we profit from some of those species too
2) Climate Change. This one gets all the media attention, and it is a valid cause. Most Western countries are in a relatively good position in regards to impact of climate change, but even for us any dollar spent today to fight climate change will save us multiple dollars over the coming decades. We can deal with extreme weather and build better costal fortifications, but those things aren't cheap. Also nobody wants to deal with the upcoming migration crisis as poorer countries become ever less livable due to climate change
3) Imminent Health Concerns. European cities suffer from high concentrations of airborne particulate matter, primarily from residential heating and car exhaust that lingers in the air in densely built cities. This is the primary reason city centers become inaccessible to certain vehicle types and governments push for heat pumps. Particulates are linked to a range of health issues. Heart disease, respiratory infections, chronic lung disease, cancers, preterm births [1]. Sure, China is much worse, but that doesn't mean we can't make people's lives better and save on health care costs by reducing the amount of particulates we emit in densely populated areas
Besides, there is no real energy shortage. Renewables and nuclear work very well for most of Europe. The only problem are the Germans who thought being dependent on gas supplied by an insane dictator is better than operating nuclear power plants.
That's the problem with well-meaning fanatics - you can't discuss consensus with them, middle ground is their ground only. Even extreme moves are never enough. So what we are seeing - people like trump who don't give a fuck about environment are winning, slowly but surely. There is no reversal in next decades, its hard to accept since I wish it to be true but it won't.
Inability of far eco left to have any sort of meaningful dialog and find middle ground is the reason why all these at glance well-meaning policies are going to backfire massively, and they already do as OP mentions. Why should we head to poverty while all developing world coast on us, steal our tech like germany's solar cells tech and we are just left behind.
I'll never vote for any green-related party despite being a massive nature and wilderness lover. Those people are literal personification of 'road to hell is paved with good intentions', IMHO a form of simpleton's eco-terrorism.
No snarky comment is going to change that.
I just don't see it happen. Most countries are democracies and turkeys don't vote for Christmas. It's not fair and I don't agree with it but it's realistic.
Add to that the 20 year delay in CO2 emissions and effect and most of it is already locked in.
You seem to have gathered the wrong impression here. Yes, a certain amount of global warming is pretty much locked in, and that levels is high enough that it's gonna cause some pretty big problems. That doesn't mean that continuing to emmit CO2 at current levels for the next several decades won't make things significantly worse.
> Many areas will be fine and some will even improve (eg Siberia and Northern Canada might become a lot more habitable.
This also isn't true. While there are areas that will grow more temperate for growing crops, that doesn't mean those areas will be fine (or have good soil to do so). Sure Alaska might be able to grow more giant vegetables, but could lose a significant part or all of their fisheries and will face more problems with wildfires that it does today. Permafrost melting will destroy infrastructure. These northern ecosystems tend to be pretty fragile and warmer temperatures could cause significant ecological collapse.
There are areas where the impacts will be greater and lesser. There aren't significant areas that will be better off due to climate change.
For americans this is easy peasy squabble far from home about topics you don't care nor know enough, for Europe and its democracy this is existential threat.
Funnily enough russia will mostly benefit from global warming so they have 0 reasons to act in any good way. Their burning military warehouses blowing up so big time earthquakes are detected far away produced more pollution than whole Europe driving around.
If you measure world-war scale conflict damage just in amount of GDP cost then its hard to discuss reasonably topics with Ivans of this world.
Please fact-check your first paragraph for the start.
Los Angeles after it rains (scrubs the air clean) and during the pandemic (drastically less traffic) was stunning. So, no, at least here, we’re not “clean enough”.
Don’t throw stuff in rivers. Ok.
Teathered bottle cap. Dumb.
Then there is the whole scam of recycling: https://youtu.be/NLkfpjJoNkA
Earth biosphere is collapsing.
Your complaint re: bottle cap: I stopped seeing caps in gutters.
Your complaint re: recycling scam: a non-scam way of doing is how Netherlands does it and it imports(!) trash because it's profitable.
Plastic straws can be made out of compostable plastic.
And the fucking plutocracy could stop flying everywhere every day.
Do you think that people who were inclined to discard bottle caps were correctly binning their bottles?
No, they were also throwing down their bottles which were more easily carried away by the rain and wind. Now, both the cap and the bottle are being washed into rivers instead of the caps being left behind. Net improvement: zero.
It's a classic example of survivorship bias. It's like the headline that bottle caps were the third most common litter on beaches - because bottles, sandwiches wrappers and crisp packets had been washed out to sea.
I wasn't familiar with tethered bottle caps until now. I'm curious what's wrong with them.