The nice thing is we had the chance. However the people who had the power decided that monies is more important than a sphere of dirt.
It's just too bad that we don't have a replacement for the latter one. Tough luck, maybe next time.
It's just too bad that we don't have a replacement for the latter one. Tough luck, maybe next time.
Is that really true?
In the past decades, we really had two options to reduce CO2: massive decrease in standard of living; or massive switch to non-carbon energy -- the only one we had the tech for it nuclear (and even then, I don't think we had the battery tech to move to electric vehicles until recently).
Very few voters would have chosen a massive decrease in standard of living. Though many voters/activists rejected nuclear power.
Now we have solar, wind and battery tech that allows us to move away from carbon-based energy. But that adoption has slowed. Partly because the US has been drilling oil like crazy -- both to reduce inflation and to counter Russia. (And, arguably, driving a Tesla has suddenly become less fashionable since Elon has gone to the Right.)
We could cut a looooot of useless shit before our standard of living are impacted. And for the things we can't do without we have huge margins to improve.
I feel like a lot of people think "any kind of concession or compromise is an unbearable attack on my god given rights to do whatever the fuck I want whenever the fuck I want", if that's your point of view then of course, we can do absolutely nothing about climate change
Do tell.
We can continue with (un)controlled deforestation for mining and palm oil (and increasing its use despite its health hazards), uncontrolled tapping of natural water resources just to sell it as bottled water (remember Nestlé CEO doesn't believe that water is a human right because they can sell it).
Let's add burning petrol wells, untapped methane leaks, oil companies' lobbying to slow down EV adoption, etc. etc. etc...
More on EVs & cars: Formula 1 cars are hybrids way before passenger cars were. This tech would have trickled down way earlier in history. SAAB made 4-cylinter Turbocharged 9-3 and made a compelling, powerful car for everyone, but everyone, esp. US. opted for V8s for "manly" reasons.
...lastly, let's not get started on single-use plastics and how we have been deceived with this arrowy-triangle and recycling.
We had the chance.
P.S.: I keep adding things, but there's also planned obsolescence. e.g.: I have a perfectly fine BT headphone with great sound quality, but I can't replace its battery without destroying it. How being able to replace its battery impacts my quality of life?
Do we need 40 PC companies releasing 20 new laptops each every year ?
Do we need 40 smartphone makers releasing 20 new phones each every year ?
Do we need humongous cars requiring humongous engines, humongous brake pads and tires (massive source of pollution)
How is using a three tonnes metal cage to displace your 80kg ass three miles efficient ?
Do we need earbuds with soldered batteries ? The earbuds should be good for decades but the soldered battery is toast after a few years, same for laptops
Do we need fast fashion and shitty gadgets from china ? 20%+ of france's post packages comes from shein/temu, that's an insane waste of resource and energy: https://www.francetvinfo.fr/economie/vente-en-ligne-temu-et-...
&c.
Take a few steps back and look around you, what the fuck are we even doing ? 80% of all that shit isn't actually bringing anything in term of quality of life
Paraphrased: "The clothes had longer lives back then, because we were unable to weave fabric that thin (i.e. low quality). Since we can do now, we do it."
IOW: Things are more expensive and lower quality, because we want you to buy more things and spend more, so we can make more monies.
Note that no one has argued for a planned economy.
This place is filled with very smart dumb people...
In CERN LHC teams, every problem is assigned to two groups, and their sensors are placed on the opposite ends of the accelerator relative to each other. Both starts from scratch, come up with completely different approaches to the same problem, and solve it independently, verifying each other in the process.
Higgs Boson is found by two teams, one week apart, independently verifying that it exists. You can apply this to any grand challenge. Space, AI, etc. Create two super-teams, NDA them, give them money and let loose.
Do we need to smelt energy intensive aluminium for useless trinkets and gadgets?
Do we need to work energy intensive steel for useless trinkets and gadgets?
Do we need disposables vapes?
Do we need the flood of useless junk on Amazon and Alibaba that breaks after a couple of uses?
Do we need fast-food places selling meat?
Do we need fast-food?
Do we need fast fashion?
Do we need all the ultra-processed foods like crisps, candies, cookies, etc.?
etc etc etc
I think the answer quickly becomes nothing. Just eat food, sleep somewhere safe and wait for something to kill you.
We need to be healthy, so we need medical help and assistance.
We need education.
We need friends and communities.
We need entertainment.
We need hope in the future.
That's exactly what I'm talking about lmao, people like you just completely lack the imagination, as if uber food delivery, 4 hours of netflix a day and buying a new iphone every year was the end game of humanity...
What about job security, healthcare, a community, a fulfilling job, &c. ? None of this requires soon to be e-waste tech gadgets, cheap cloth made from the most vile fabric known to mankind, huge SUV doing 0-60mph in 3s
Sure we got saved from polio and famines, instead we now die from lack of exercise, depression and obesity, that's not even the worst part, we're doing this while permanently fucking up our planet.
We should be allowed to scientifically research solar radiation management at small scales! However, currently, it is effectively banned. It’s crazy to me.
The specific experiment mentioned in the article was halted due to a lack of community engagement. The organizers failed to inform or invite the local mayor to the deployment event, leading to public backlash when residents learned about it from the New York Times. Much of the misunderstanding came from a perception that the experiment involved risky technology, though in reality, it was as simple as using a patio mister mounted on a retired warship.
What I was referencing, however, is Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI), which differs significantly from MCB in both the type of aerosol used (typically sulfur dioxide, SO₂) and the location of the injection (the stratosphere, rather than the lower atmosphere). If you're interested in learning more about SAI, here's an excellent primer: https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/so2-injection
I'm glad I didn't have kids and I hope I don't live to see the worst effects of climate change. As for the rest of humanity: good fuckin luck y'all, you'll need it.
a: We had more snow in the past.
b: Maybe we have less now because everything is warming up?
a: Nah, bullshit. It's just a phase, it'll pass.
For God's sake, people believe when their app says that it'll rain in 15 minutes, but won't believe it that they'll be broiled in 15 years. It's the same calculations basically!
...and despite all this knowledge and we know what we're doing and how we're doing it, many people deny that we did something to the environment and we're here now.
oh, boy.