@ScienceDesk Another potentially useful element is greater access to carsharing services.
There are many people who want or need to be able to drive sometimes/occasionally, but with access to both good public transit that can serve most of their needs and car-share cars that can be used for needs the transit system can't easily serve even with expansion, fewer people would need personal vehicles.
The hidden potential of tree diversity for enriching soil fertility
Overall, increased tree diversity enhanced soil carbon storage by 30% to 32% and enhanced nitrogen storage by 42% to 50% on a decadal timescale
https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/tree-diversity-increases-storage-carbon-nitrogen-soil/158116/
#ClimateEmergency #pollution #ecology #environment #ClimateCrisis #ClimateCatastrophe #ClimateDiary #Climate
This is a fantastic project! As someone who has flown exactly once since 2004 (family medical reasons) and goes out of the way to take the train or bus whenever practical, I felt much less alone reading the biographies.
I noticed this was an older toot and the site hasn't moved - should you need any additional help with moving and maintaining it feel free to reach out! Not a professional web dev, but I've done prior domain name changes and WordPress setup.
Thanks very much for sharing this - definitely a topic I would to explore further.
But yes, it raises good questions - how do we frame the idea of not spending on things we don't need in a way that is acceptable (and even positive - I believe this is possible, to find ways to make connection and belonging, which do more for our well-being, more important than "stuff") to people with a diversity of worldviews/experiences/ideologies?
(And also with sensitivity to genuine needs - I'm not sure anyone needs a private jet or a yacht, and much commercial air travel could be avoided, but asking people to entirely sacrifice traveling for medical care or to be with family could make them not want to sacrifice anything...)
This is interesting. I'd been previously familiar with the popularization of psychological distance and self-efficacy/response-efficacy as key factors in moving from climate awareness to climate action, but good to know that as the article notes focusing on the latter is probably more useful than the former.
While the article wisely warns against using intuition alone to draw conclusions - it does make intuitive sense that focusing on "how can we be effective at creating substantive change", at this point in public knowledge of climate change, is more useful than awareness.
I would also wonder about the difference between psychological distance as far as "this will affect people in other countries" vs "this will affect people in my country" vs "this will affect me, personally". Based on 2021 Yale Climate Opinion Survey data, the difference in commonality between the latter two (64% vs. 47% belief) is greater than that between the first two (68% vs. 64% belief). But of course awareness of personal effects has to be paired with sense of efficacy to avoid paralysis.
https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/ycom-us/