Bread and CircusesJun 14, 2023

Here's an article explaining "Why Only Degrowth Will Save The World."

From the introduction...
_________________________

Let’s be clear. It isn’t ‘climate change’ that’s the problem. It’s a multitude of crises stemming from the fact that our current capitalist economy, predicated on endless accumulation and extraction, has tipped nature out of balance. And if we don’t change this system, we are screwed.
_________________________

They suggest following these basic principles:

✦ Never extract more than ecosystems can regenerate.
✦ Never waste or pollute more than ecosystems can safely absorb.

And then they propose a plan of action...
_________________________

1. End planned obsolescence — Guzzling materials and energy only for them to be useless in a few years, all in the name of the growth imperative, is madness. Policy options include extended warranties on products and the right to repair products. Take the Fairphone, for example.

2. Cut advertising — Advertising, especially when tied to social media giants like Google and Facebook, is mass manipulation on an unprecedented scale. Hickel calls it an “assault on our consciousness — the colonisation of not only our public spaces but our minds, to make us desire things we don’t need”. Policy options include quotas on ad expenditure, legislation, banning ads in public spaces, and social policies to reduce inequality.

3. Move from ownership to usership — especially for equipment that is necessary but rarely used. Take lawnmowers, for example, or cars. Common Asset trusts, anyone?

4. End food waste — Around 50% of all the food produced in the world, about 2 billion tonnes, is wasted every year. This is an insane ecological cost, in terms of energy, land, water, and emissions. Ending this could cut the scale of damage caused by the agricultural industry in half.

5. Scale down ecologically destructive industries — such as the fossil fuel industry (obviously), the beef industry, the arms industry, the commercial airline industry, etc.
_________________________

I like the sound of this. How about you?

FULL ARTICLE -- https://medium.com/the-new-climate/why-only-degrowth-will-save-the-world-2a4b1bf35011

Note that this is all based on work by Jason Hickel (@jasonhickel), especially as contained in his book, Less is More.

GET THE BOOK -- https://www.jasonhickel.org/less-is-more

#Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #ClimateCrisis #ClimateEmergency #Capitalism #BusinessAsUsual #Degrowth

Show threadDavid FetterJun 14, 2023
@breadandcircuses @jasonhickel nobody ever built anything using just an axe and a saw. If you want people on board, you have to explain how their lives will be better, not just how much privation you plan to inflict on them.
Show threadTom RitchfordJun 14, 2023

@davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

But it won't be better for them, of course. Consuming unlimited amounts of fossil fuels makes our lives better.

In order to not destroy the ecosystem, people will have to give things up now, so their descendants can survive.

No one will do that. We will continue to consume exponentially until we destroy our ecosystem and most of humanity.

We are stealing a future from our grandchildren so we can have disposable plastic crap and junk food.

Show threadDavid FetterJun 15, 2023

@TomSwirly @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel How's that whole puritanical hectoring thing been working out for the past 50+ years? Getting a lot of action? Motivating people to make massive societal changes? No? Gee, I wonder why not.

The choice you offer between Capitalist Hellscape and AnPrim/Eugenics/Fascism, and make no mistake, this is the choice you're offering, just makes people not take you seriously because BOTH choices you offer suck.

We can live wonderful lives with clean, ubiquitous, reliable nuclear energy, and that's the message we need to get out there. We don't have to have capitalism. We don't have to have privation.

Show threadTom RitchfordJun 15, 2023

@davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

I see rudeness; I see anger; and particularly, I see no argument at all and no numbers.

I'm a big proponent of nuclear power but people won't accept it. More, it is far, far to late to fix it by building nuclear power plants as we only have a few years' carbon budget left.

Let's see your numbers. How would it work?

Such rudeness; such anger. You should consider therapy, because the rage isn't good for you or anyone left who might care about you.

Show threadAndreas, DJ3EI, he/himJun 15, 2023

The climate catastrophe essence: Enjoy now, let our descendens pay later.

The nuclear power essence: Enjoy now, let our descendens pay later. Nuclear waste must be kept out of the biosphere for 1.000.000 years.

Let's build something that could contain it, wait 1.000.000 years, see how it held up, and only then reconsider the nuclear option.

@TomSwirly @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

Show threadElon Muksis 🇺🇦 🇵🇸 🇪🇺Jun 15, 2023
@dj3ei @TomSwirly @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-wastes/radioactive-wastes-myths-and-realities.aspx
Radioactive Wastes - Myths and Realities : World Nuclear Association - World Nuclear Association

News and information on nuclear power, nuclear energy, nuclear energy for sustainable development, uranium mining, uranium enrichment, nuclear generation of electricity, used fuel management, recycling and disposal, nuclear policies, new nuclear plant, nuclear energy development and climate change mitigation from the World Nuclear Association (WNA), the global nuclear energy trade association and World Nuclear News (WNN) the leading nuclear news site.

Show threadTom RitchfordJun 16, 2023

@bhasic @dj3ei @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

Now do CO2. Now do soot.

https://seas.harvard.edu/news/2021/02/deaths-fossil-fuel-emissions-higher-previously-thought

The danger from the climate catastrophe is orders of magnitude greater than the threat from nuclear waste. It's like being frightened of an ant when a lion is about to eat you.

Deaths from fossil fuel emissions higher than previously thought

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for more than 8 million people worldwide in 2018

Show threadAndreas, DJ3EI, he/himJun 19, 2023

Climate kills faster right now. Sure.

That doesn't mean it's inherently the more dangerous of the two, "by orders of magnitude".

We've had glaciers all 100000 years with some regularity in the past. So maybe the climate catastrophe itself (not the bio damage) might be over by then? The dangers from nuclear waste last a factor 10 longer.

But the main point: Preferring nuclear power over renewables does not repair climate.

@TomSwirly @bhasic @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

Show threadTom RitchfordJun 19, 2023

@dj3ei @bhasic @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

Fossil fuels kill eight million people a year already: https://seas.harvard.edu/news/2021/02/deaths-fossil-fuel-emissions-higher-previously-thought

This is orders of magnitude greater than nuclear.

At this point there is a near-certainty that we will decimate our ecosystem with CO2.

This is orders of magnitude greater than the risks of nuclear.

Deaths from fossil fuel emissions higher than previously thought

Fossil fuel air pollution responsible for more than 8 million people worldwide in 2018

Show threadAndreas, DJ3EI, he/him

These arguments are from a short-term perspective only. We don't know yet how many people nuclear will kill in the long term. As don't know how we'll eventually solve or not solve the nuclear waste problem, prediction are difficult.

Fortunately, we can put our money into renewables instead of nuclear. Gives more bang for the buck now, and also doesn't increase nuclear waste terror in the future.

@TomSwirly @bhasic @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel

Jun 19, 2023 at 12:25pmWeb
Show threadElon Muksis 🇺🇦 🇵🇸 🇪🇺Jun 19, 2023
@dj3ei @TomSwirly @davidfetter @breadandcircuses @jasonhickel There is no nuclear waste problem. You may not know how it is managed, but others do. Prediction is very simple.