How do we actually get out of this climate disaster?
How do we actually get out of this climate disaster?
Nothing. There is literally nothing you can do.
…carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-profile-china/
“China is the world’s largest annual greenhouse gas emitter.
In 2020, it emitted 12.3bn tonnes of CO2 equivalent (GtCO2e), amounting to 27% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the CAIT database maintained by the World Resources Institute (WRI). This includes emissions from land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF).
. . .
It is a “non-Annex I” party to the convention, meaning it is not obligated to contribute climate finance and was not required to make binding emissions cuts under the Kyoto Protocol.”
Nothing changes until China changes.
Way to put the blame on China when all of the Occident delocalized production over there. Every rich country needs to change, and they also need to help emerging countries to develop sustainably too. We spent centuries destroying the environment for growth and now we’re on top, we can’t tell these countries not to do everything we did because it’s not sustainable.
Agreed on the “not much you can do on an individual level” though. We need to change the way we consume and live but it’s peanuts compared to what needs to change for mega corpos and countries.
You can find data on recycling where “being shipped to another country to be recycled” counts as being recycled I believe. Also you can find estimates of historical emissions by country since the industrial revolution. China is the current leader of emissions but I believe the US is top of all time, closely followed by Europe. I’ll try to find some data when I have a moment.
Edit: Historical emissions
Given that China has ~18% of the world’s population, it’s not super shocking that they produce 27% of emissions (especially given how much manufacturing has been outsourced there).
By comparison, the US has less than 5% of the world population and produces ~11% of emissions, without only Saudi Arabia being higher in per person emissions.
Do what you can to stop feeding the petroleum products industry. They use the money you give them to literally fuel this crisis.
If you own your home, check into federal, state, and local rebates for these things:
Adding to these good suggestions: shop at thrift stores.
And if you have time: volunteer at a thrift store.
So existential dread and weed it is.
LOL so you really think?
You really, really believe that we are going to listen when somebody claims to know “the only way”??
The most effective thing you can do is try and influence local, state, and federal policies that will reduce emissions.
I’ve made several changes in my life, but I know in the grand scheme of things it won’t have any effect.
Degrowth until we live within planetary bounds accomplished with cultural evolution and ending capitalism is the only thing that could actually work.
All other proposed solutions fail to address the fundamental unsustainability of our way of life and could only hope to slightly slow our demise.
This is the biggest reduction to your possible carbon footprint. I’m glad I have been successful with this step.
And, please, raise a kid or three to pass that along. Just don’t produce them.
We wont.
That is reality, it doesn’t matter if the entire world turn off fossil fuel usage permanently this instant, there is allready far too much greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere to reverse course, we might get to delay the inevitable a decade or so, but shit is comming.
It’s weird how ‘not giving up’ got us penicillin and earthquake warnings, so I’d hope we do a little more than “we won’t. Oh well.”
We are making progress down paths that could shorten the correction after all the CO² and methane is removed from the atmosphere, and it seems important to explore the potential – as many as we can, actually, as science often fails.
comming
I may need a translation. Related to comms, like in communications?
comming
It’s a typo of coming. As in the word “come” or “to arrive”.
It boils down to cash.
Companies can make money off penicillin. Governments can readily allocate funds to visible, common disasters.
Disasters that have been a century in the making and require whole nations to change the way they do things for an observable result decades down the line is almost impossible to get money for. Our shortsightedness is our downfall
CO²
I may need a translation. CO² like in E = mc²? What is the square of oxygen?
Adapt to it as best we can. Minimize your use of fossil fuels, particularly Natural Gas(Methane)
We're past the point that we can go back. The glaciers on Antarctica and Greenland are in a self-sustaning melt cycle at this point.
assassinate the top 1%.
If each of us able bodied where to go and collect scalps of the top 1% we’d have a fighting chance.
Destroy the supply chain. It’s surprisingly fragile, and if it fell over it might even be impossible to rebuild. For instance, energy production has a whole bunch of dependencies on mining, which requires large amounts of energy - and all the infrastructure requires constant maintenance, which requires all the infrastructure.
One swift kick in the nadgers and the whole system goes down in a tangled heap, with all your tools at the bottom.
Large-scale industry would be crippled out of existence for a very long time, possibly forever - and maybe the oceans wouldn’t end up boiling.
There are plenty of chokepoints in the system, where a small disruption could have disastrous effects. Just look what one ship screwed up by getting temporarily stuck in a canal for a couple of weeks. If a nation or two set their mind to it, they could throw a spanner or three in the works that would rip the whole engine apart.
The human cost would be utterly devastating, of course. Billions would die, and the knock-on effects would just accelerate the decline.
But the way things are going, they’re all going to die anyway, and take the rest of the planet down with them. This way seems less-worse, and we get to play The Last Of Us irl.
It’s as easy as stop reproducing.
So, ummm… Welp.
Damn.
My husband once said “we’re not killing the planet, we’re just rearranging it in a way that is not conducive to human life”. I think about that when I feel hopeless, we’re just a blip on a bigger radar, and we need to drop the main character syndrome that the world dies when we do.
Also though, scalp the 1%.
It has taken about 100 years to create this problem.
We can start to solve it, maybe today, or maybe tomorrow, but it won’t go away within a single election period…
If you’re a world leader fishing for ideas then you could try using regulatory bodies, alternatives incentives, and monetary policies to do the following: disincentivising plastic import/manufacturing, disincentivising meat consumption, disincentivising car ownership/road-expansion, disincentivising pets, disincentivising power consumption and fossil fuels, and finally funding education and promoting smaller families with less children (these last two things are intrinsically linked). You also have to come to an agreement to do all of these things alongside other nations, because if your nation stops producing as many cows and pigs then some impoverished nation will just crank up their own production to fill the market gap.
Basically, we would only use a third as much agricultural land to live on if we didn’t eat meat. With less people that would use even less land with an added bonus of lower emissions by a massive amount per person in developed nation because of lower fuel cost and power consumption. You can lower emissions even more by investing heavily into more efficient modes of transport like railways and buses, in many cases making towns and cities as well as large distance travel doable on foot without a car. We know that educated people, particularly women, lead to lower population growth: which is a good thing, because less emissions and more productivity. Basically two techniques are being deployed in this example: lower emissions per person and lower number of persons.
Will this fix the damage we’ve done to the atmosphere and the planet? No, more complex solutions would need to be employed for individual problems like atmospheric methane to ensure our planet continues to be livable for the next century, but we know for a fact that even slightly lowered human activity has a huge beneficial impact because we saw those beneficial effects firsthand during the pandemic.
But wtf do I know, I’m a banjo. You’re a world leader. Visit some Universities and figure it out.