[HN Gopher] A 3degC world has no safe place
___________________________________________________________________
A 3degC world has no safe place
Author : lsllc
Score : 104 points
Date : 2021-07-23 22:12 UTC (47 minutes ago)
(HTM) web link (www.economist.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.economist.com)
| scoofy wrote:
| American here. I took a bunch of earth science classes in college
| in 1999. I realized then, I would just plan ahead and aim for an
| urbanist lifestyle, because our country would have to change. I
| focused on transit alternatives as my primary advocacy, because
| it was the most obvious low-hanging fruit and paired with the
| public health.
|
| I never imagined this would happen, but as the years went on, I
| grew less astonished and more cynical.
|
| I honestly don't know how to deal with the level nihilism and
| genuine bitterness I feel toward my fellow man regarding climate
| change. This was never a political divide. The american culture
| was full of anti-scientific absurdity on the the right, and
| complete symbolism without substance on the left.
|
| We don't even have serious bicycle or transit prioritization _in
| our major urban areas_. We don 't have any concern for reducing
| our meat consumption. We don't have any concern for alternatives
| to airlines. We're to the point where only geoengineering can
| help, which is honestly nuts. I just, I mean, I know where I'm
| planning on settling down literally based on real estate in
| relation to climate change. It's surreal.
| hindsightbias wrote:
| James Burke's After the Warming:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfE8wBReIxw
|
| Circa 1989.
| bostonsre wrote:
| Silicon valley is safe climate wise (it's like artificial weather
| here), we just need to build a damn or some kind of lock system
| under the golden gate bridge, then a series of walls and mine
| fields to keep out the rifraf. </s>
| davidw wrote:
| Transportation accounts for around 30% of carbon emissions in the
| US. We could do a lot worse than rethinking our 'suburban
| experiment' where many people are forced to use an automobile for
| things our ancestors could walk to in 5 minutes, to paraphrase
| Chuck Marohn of Strong Towns.
| _robbywashere wrote:
| I always enjoy the apocalypse articles being paywalled
| chana_masala wrote:
| Maybe it wouldn't have mattered, but I wish that the Fahrenheit
| increase would have been more prominently used over these years.
| I think that most Americans don't realize that 1degC is more than
| 1degF so it doesn't sound as bad when it's "only a few degrees"
| mulmen wrote:
| Ok but even 1degC is pretty bad? Even 1degF is bad.
|
| If we were going for emotional effect shouldn't it be expressed
| in Kelvin, or a temperature scale that is designed specifically
| to scare the public? Something where 3degC is 20degScare?
| dragontamer wrote:
| > If we were going for emotional effect shouldn't it be
| expressed in Kelvin
|
| A difference in 1K is equivalent to 1C difference. The thing
| is, when Celsius scale was invented, they didn't have a
| concept of "absolute zero" yet.
|
| Once "absolute zero" was known, then Kelvin units were
| invented, which were equivalent to C except that 0 means
| absolute zero.
| nnamtr wrote:
| FWIW Celsius and Kelvin have the same scale, they're just
| shifted.
| actually_a_dog wrote:
| I don't think it would make any difference, TBH. A difference
| of 3degC is "only" 5.4degF. That still doesn't _seem_ too bad,
| at first thought, until you realize that it 's 5.4degF
| difference _forever_ (or, at least well into the foreseeable
| future).
| cwp wrote:
| Perhaps. But I suspect the bigger issue is that even 5.4degF
| still doesn't sound like much. It's hard to communicate that
| the average temperature implies much higher highs and many
| "unusually hot" days.
| jasonbourne1901 wrote:
| Shoulda used microkelvins!
| dataflow wrote:
| Honestly both of them are small, and I think citing the degrees
| is just terrible messaging altogether. I think people would
| _gladly_ accept & adapt to even a 5degF increase; I know I
| would. The problem is that doesn't capture anything about the
| local variation (and impacts like hurricanes, fires, etc.), and
| that even beyond that, we're absolutely _destroying_ everything
| about our planet as we know it, and a single-degree change in
| average temperatures is just icing on the cake.
| einpoklum wrote:
| Try to sit in a bath of 36degC. You can sit there for hours.
| Now switch to a bath of 38degC. After a while you'll be
| sweaty, sluggish, tired, breath harder etc.
|
| They have this at the St. Gellert baths in Budapest:
|
| https://afar-
| production.imgix.net/uploads/images/post_images...
| paulcole wrote:
| OK 3C is 5.4F for anyone who is wondering.
|
| I don't think that's the straw that would've broken the climate
| change camel's back in America.
| azalemeth wrote:
| I equally wish that more Americans used SI -- Farenheit is
| about as familiar to me as Rankine; I have been bitten by the
| US use of 'mil' to mean thousandths of an inch whilst remaining
| how some en-gb engineers use it as inaccurate slang for mm. But
| this is a big distraction. Alas, I know that the whole reason
| we're in this pickle is that scientific literacy is low, and
| most people prefer short term gains over longer ones. In many
| ways the increased rate of increase in temperature might be a
| good thing, as it makes more people intuitively get that
| something is very, _very_ wrong.
|
| As an aside, most professional oceanographers or climate
| scientists I know are depressed, furious, or grant writing --
| or a linear superposition of all three.
| donatj wrote:
| > I have been bitten by the US use of 'mil' to mean
| thousandths of an inch
|
| Huh, I live in the US and I've only ever heard that called a
| thou but wikipedia backs you up. I'd think a mil would be a
| millionth of an inch.
| pengaru wrote:
| Different units of measurement will not make it any less of a
| hoax or inconvenient truth preferably ignored.
| xupybd wrote:
| Humans have trouble detecting less than a 2degC change in
| temperature. The truth is changes on global averages seem tiny
| because we use temperature as the metric. The temperature
| change is tiny. The heat energy is huge. We should use energy
| as the metric.
| 6d6b73 wrote:
| We're about to go into a mini ice age and there is no stopping
| it.
| fspacef wrote:
| Fascinating.
| ardit33 wrote:
| Canada and northern part of the US will be fine (north of the
| mason dixon line). Places like Albany, NY, or Minesota, or most
| of Canada, appart from the occasional crazy swings, are going to
| be more lovely places to live, with slightly milder winters.
|
| The southern part is toast, both from water level rises, and lack
| of fresh water.
|
| In this country, the ones that are going to be the most affected
| by global warming, seem like to care the less.
|
| PS: Canada has a target goal to reach 100mil by 2100. They know
| they are going to be a more milder place to live overall (with
| the crazy swing), and there will be much more areas open for
| human habitation. That's why they are increasing their
| immigration quotas.
|
| https://www.centuryinitiative.ca/
| 8note wrote:
| Parts of Canada, sure. I imagine places like Newfoundland not
| changing much.
|
| The north will see big changes from permafrost melting, the
| west will see more smoke, more floods, and water shortages as
| the glacier melt is replaced by rain.
|
| BC will be on fire more, and the forests will die off / need to
| be replanted with different species of trees
| john_moscow wrote:
| I don't think the climate change will be solved by laypeople
| having shorter showers, sitting in tiny condos without air
| conditioning and buying groceries with the big word
| "SUSTAINABLE" all over the packaging.
|
| Much more realistically, just like COVID-19 made mRNA
| commercially viable, actual decrease in quality of life from
| the climate change will pave the road to engineered carbon-
| capturing plants, or some smart sun-reflecting particles, or
| something else.
|
| So if you want to help solve climate change, go study
| biotechnology and get serious about it. Making your own life
| arbitrarily uncomfortable and finding a meaning of life in
| pressuring peers to follow suit won't move the needle in a
| statistically significant way.
| mulmen wrote:
| I'm not sure that they care less or they are just too terrified
| to actually think about it.
| cwp wrote:
| Tell that to the residents of Lytton.
| nyx wrote:
| Right? It hit 116degF in Portland, Oregon last month, hotter
| than the record highs in such places as Dallas, Miami, New
| Orleans, and downtown LA.
|
| The notion that there's a climate change safe zone is an
| optimistic one, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of
| supporting evidence.
| ardit33 wrote:
| Agree on that part. If you are on a heat bowl area, you will
| have to deal with it, and getting the short end of the stick.
| danans wrote:
| > In this country, the ones that are going to be the most
| affected by global warming, seem like to care the less.
|
| This is ignoring the fact that if the southern coastal US is
| toast the northern areas are going to have a climate refugee
| crisis on their hands.
| jeffbee wrote:
| Many coastal people seem to assume that the federal
| government will bail them out in great abundance, which,
| let's face it, is probably true.
| ardit33 wrote:
| That's true. We have already been dealing with it (the last
| central american immigrant surge), and NYC had a huge influx
| of comers from Porto Rico after the last two hurricanes.
|
| Dealing with it is still easier than having your place
| underwater like 1/3 of Florida might be one day. Places like
| NYC have to shore up low land areas, but it is still in much
| better shape than either Florida, Arizona, Southern CA (lack
| of fresh water, and fires).
|
| Global warming is really going to hit places differently.
| There is a huge difference between having to deal with the
| occasional heat wave, or flood, and with having to deal with
| your whole area being permanently under-water, or complete
| lack of drinking water.
| lostlogin wrote:
| > Places like Albany, NY, or Minesota, or most of Canada,
| appart from the occasional crazy swings, are going to be more
| lovely places to live
|
| This may have been true a few hundred years ago, but not now.
| Where do their families live? What do they they do for work,
| food, resources and recreation? Who will they trade with? Where
| will they get consumer goods?
| rtutz wrote:
| Even if that would apply, the people won't stay in the south
| for very long if it becomes impossible to live there. I don't
| think there will be a secret enclave that can just ignore the
| impact of global warming.
| Applejinx wrote:
| No, because climate is a chaotic system and nothing, nowhere,
| will be 'slightly milder'. You are mistaken. It ain't about a
| minor shift in baseline plus sea-level changing, though sea-
| level changing is still a thing.
|
| I'm IN the Northeast, not far from Albany. The crazy swings are
| less and less occasional and that's a trend that continues to
| escalate. I consider the location pretty much optimal. That's a
| far cry from 'fine', and the distinction is important.
| lmilcin wrote:
| Just wait for all migrants from places that will be becoming
| uninhabitable.
| wait_a_minute wrote:
| When is this projected to happen, realistically? 100 years
| from now?
| revscat wrote:
| Which is irrelevant. Increasing crop failures will mean that
| even if you migrate to somewhere that is currently cool, there
| won't be enough food to feed everyone.
| kingaillas wrote:
| Climate change is more than just how mild the winters will
| become. It is also different weather patterns like heavy
| rainstorms and the resulting floods.
|
| Cologne Germany is about 50 degrees north and the surrounding
| areas were hit hard. Zhengzhou China is about 34 degrees north
| and was also hit hard by flooding. That further south than the
| Mason Dixon line... more like the latitude of Raleigh, North
| Carolina.
|
| So sure, lovely to live if you guard against constant potential
| storms and floods, omni-present ground water, the possibility
| of several days in a row of 100+ F temps, etc.
| cobookman wrote:
| Lack of fresh water in the US is a solvable issue. We have
| oceans all around us and the US has the know-how to ship fresh,
| desalinated water from the coast to middle america.
| orwin wrote:
| Not for agricultural use in the Midwest, that the current
| issue. I mean, this is an issue right now, not in 20 years.
|
| BTW, this issue is solvable if everyone agree that meat
| should be rationned: no corn and some GMO wheat to produce
| carbs for human consumption only, a lot more vegetables and
| more forestry could do the trick.
| lettergram wrote:
| What are they talking about?
|
| In the US this will mean more rain in many regions and longer
| growing seasons. A lot of plants will quickly adapt.
|
| Historically, our planet for most of its history was warmer. It's
| all going to be fine, while we will need to adjust the world will
| continue on.
|
| Note: I'm not saying it won't be hard, but this will be a gradual
| change and will actually assist some places, while others get
| more harsh. I'm just so tired of the negativity.
|
| There's also a lot of common errors people make. For instance, is
| this avg temp? Where are we taking measurements? Everyone
| realizes year to year there's average drifts that are pretty
| substantial around the earth... etc etc
| anyonecancode wrote:
| You're far more optimistic than I about
|
| 1) how quickly agriculture can adapt to large shifts in rain
| and wind patterns -- for instance, what if "more rain" includes
| torrential downpours with massive flooding, at unpredictable
| intervals? 2) how quickly the world economy can adapt to most
| of its major cities becoming uninhabitable (even where temps
| stay reasonable, sea levels won't) 3) how adaptable political
| systems will be to unprecedented climate-driven mass
| migrations, both within and between states, and in the face of
| collapsing states?
|
| I don't think it'll be a gradual change at all -- more a series
| of rolling crises, where places spared a particular crisis
| either are at risk of being hit directly by the next one, or
| have to deal with the social, political, and economic upheaval
| as people die or flee areas directly impacted.
| _jal wrote:
| You know what "adaption" means in this context, right?
| Everything that can't tolerate the new conditions dies off, and
| different species take hold.
|
| > while we will need to adjust
|
| Sure. Mass migrations and dieoffs, social unrest, the resulting
| wars, famines and disease... NBD, right?
| dillondoyle wrote:
| Gradual? On earth timescales? There have been tons of articles
| showing that's not happening, read one today about the great
| heat wave 'die off' from the last weeks. plants/animals can't
| adapt on near the timescale of decades from what I've read.
|
| But maybe we can assist finding survivors, I remember reading
| an article a while ago about assisted coral evolution found a
| bunch of google scholar on it.
|
| https://scholar.google.fr/scholar?q=climate+change+coral+evo...
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The geopolitical reality of, say, a billion people in India
| becoming climate refugees is likely to have worldwide
| implications.
| missedthecue wrote:
| India is a big and diverse place. I don't see any realistic
| scenario where 1 billion Indians become climate refugees.
| titzer wrote:
| Will they adapt to the raging wildfires that ~1.2C has already
| induced across much of the west coast? That's some adaptin'!
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| The northern US and Canada were barren mud and rock 12000
| years ago. They'll adapt.
| borodi wrote:
| Oh the world will be absolutely fine, it will be we that
| suffer.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Like the wooly mammoths did!
| imoverclocked wrote:
| With "more rain" also comes more floods and hurricanes.
|
| Also, gradual changes are definitely not guaranteed. Weather
| and chaos theory have a lot in common; Small perturbations can
| cause massively different outcomes. Adding 3degC to the entire
| planet is not a small perturbation.
| tekromancr wrote:
| That is profoundly myopic. Sure, the "planet will adapt" or
| whatever. But how well do you think it's gonna go when a bunch
| of nuclear weapon armed nations decide that the land they live
| on is no longer hospitable?
| sicromoft wrote:
| https://archive.is/omEFY
| wyager wrote:
| This article smells more like religious eschatology than rational
| economic discussion about the costs and benefits of climate
| change. This sort of sensationalist and opinionated reporting
| hardly advances the credibility of its cause.
| revscat wrote:
| "It's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it that I
| have a problem with."
|
| This doesn't change the underlying reality, and I have a strong
| suspicion there is no means of discussing this issue that would
| meet with your approval, or your recognition that this is a
| crisis requiring significant action.
| noasaservice wrote:
| I'm sitting in my air conditioned room, in the USA. Doing
| computer stuff, naturally.
|
| I look at what I can do about this. I can turn up the temp in my
| room, and the house. Meager difference. I can use less water - I
| already am, with getting showers every other day on average. I
| can eat less meat - which I do with purchase of the beef CSA. I'm
| big into the repair movement, and repair household equipment and
| electronics with my knowledge of circuitry and 3d printing. I
| recycle, but that's if its not repairable or
| reusable/repurposable.
|
| I look at what I'm actually doing, and I'm at my limit. There
| isn't anything else I can add on to reduce footprint. And in
| reality, the same goes for many people.
|
| These global climate change issues are the sum of all the work in
| this world, but the bulk of it is emitted by companies who do the
| cheapest thing. And if dumping gigatons of CO2 or methane in the
| air makes more sense, that's done. I can petition my
| congresscritters, but it's well known they do not listen to the
| little guy (https://www.vox.com/2014/4/18/5624310/martin-gilens-
| testing-... ). Your party is irrelevant here.
|
| So what do I do? know what we're doing is what we can and hope
| some rich people pull up the cause, and not try to escape the
| atmosphere in a penis-shaped rocket.
|
| I've given up hope that this will be solved.
| rexpop wrote:
| > So what do I do? know what we're doing is what we can and
| hope some rich people pull up the cause
|
| What we do is unionize, and in a way where we can then withdraw
| our industrial contributions to climate change.
|
| > I look at what I'm actually doing, and I'm at my limit.
|
| I am willing to bet you've not yet tried to "manage up."
|
| It's not our fellow consumers who are causing climate change,
| it is supply-side; it is management. Only industrial and trade
| unions have the leverage "stop the line," and demand a less-
| profitable, albeit life-saving economy.
| joey_bob wrote:
| You can try to come up with or attempt to improve an existing
| technical solution - whether it be a green alternative to
| reduce emissions or carbon capture/terraforming. If you want a
| place to start, alternative power sources for freighters would
| have a huge impact.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| Apparently, a reasonably sustainable level of CO2 production is
| about 3T per person per year. The average in the US is about
| 7.5T pp/yr.
|
| But ... 5.3T pp/yr of that amount is caused by the existing
| coal fired power plants in the USA.
|
| So one thing you could do is to write to your elected
| representatives to specifically petition for the abandonment of
| this form of power generation and its replacement with
| renewable systems.
|
| Guaranteed to work? Nope. But if we do get rid of those plants,
| it will make a HUGE difference at the national and
| international scale.
| jcoq wrote:
| I agree and I know that climate engineering is a terrifyingly
| fraught endeavor, but I worry it's our only hope at this point.
| scoofy wrote:
| The American development pattern is the problem that we can
| actually solve. If you genuinely care, and this isn't
| pandering, read the book Strong Towns. Our cities are designed
| as inefficiently as possible, on purpose, and things like
| zoning and automobile infrastructure literally ban climate
| conscious living spaces.
|
| We should also _at least_ have a carbon tax for things like
| normalizing beef as an alternative rather than a primary food
| source.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| Other than world war, what mechanisms do you propose to get
| China, India, and the entire 3rd world on to an effective
| carbon tax plan?
|
| I mean, if the answer is world war, I'll at least give you
| credit for an honest answer. I just rarely see that come up.
| The truth is yes we can and should do better, but also
| realize that other nations will take any advantage they can,
| including ignoring climate concerns.
|
| So if it's a global problem, it needs a global solution, so
| what is that mechanism to apply one?
| 01100011 wrote:
| IMO individual action is nearly worthless beyond making you
| feel better. I did all the right things for decades and someone
| else just consumed the resources I saved by building golf
| courses and taking international vacations.
|
| The world needs more Elon Musk types to think big and bring a
| lower carbon footprint to modern living. Thinking people will
| voluntarily put themselves at a disadvantage for the greater
| good goes against much of what we know of human nature.
| abeppu wrote:
| Up until now, I think it's been too hard to direct your money
| away from the companies emitting loads of carbon. But I wonder,
| now that Europe is talking about a border tax for imported
| carbon, and the US has introduced legislation for a border tax,
| could that change, even before other places institute the same?
| To be eligible for import to Europe, would producers elsewhere
| need to tally and report the carbon associated with goods, such
| that non-European consumers could also finally have the
| information to choose lower-emission options?
| ostenning wrote:
| Civil disobedience? But even then it's crazy that people have
| to glue themselves to objects in the middle of highways to be
| heard and even then nothing really changes.
|
| We had the technology to solve these problems years ago. This
| isn't a technological problem, this is a problem about values.
| Do we value money or our environment more?
|
| The climate catastrophe unfolding will be the biggest wake up
| humanity has ever had. That is the only silver lining to this
| existential predicament
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| > I look at what I can do about this. I can turn up the temp in
| my room, and the house.
|
| > So what do I do? know what we're doing is what we can
|
| Everything you do is inconsequential in the face of you living
| in a detached single family home on a quarter acre lot.
|
| That very simple fact has exponential knock on effects
| requiring so much more mass to move so much further and hence
| consuming so much more energy, that everything else you do is
| meaningless.
|
| The only solutions were reducing total consumption, either per
| capita or capitas itself, but the former is not going to happen
| if people live in insufficiently dense manners that preclude
| public transport or walking and bicycling, and necessitate
| large roads, parking lots, and personal vehicles.
| jdavis703 wrote:
| You can also:
|
| * Switch to using 100% renewable energy from your electric
| company.
|
| * Live in an apartment where shared walls, floors and ceilings
| means lower energy usage
|
| * Move to a city where you can walk, bicycle or transit (or at
| least have a short drive to most things).
|
| But the most important is to become involved in climate
| politics, especially state and local politics. Even in
| California (the largest state in the union) all you need is a
| dozen or so people to get a meeting with a state
| representative.
| holoduke wrote:
| Its like a little kid making a mess of his room. He or she will
| never prevent the mess. But the mess will always be fixed. I
| have good faith that the human species will fix it. One day the
| entire biosphere will be controlled.
| bradenb wrote:
| I think this is overly optimistic. While I think I agree, you
| make it sound like there will be no consequences. I think
| things will get much worse before the human race decides to
| do something about it.
| [deleted]
| rexpop wrote:
| The mess will not "always be fixed," because we have no
| parents in this analogy. We are the leaders in this world.
| You are simply taking on the role of an adolescent shirking
| responsibility.
| titzer wrote:
| > I look at what I'm actually doing, and I'm at my limit.
|
| Smaller house, solar panels, don't drive, don't eat meat, and
| don't have kids. And don't vote for politicians who are busy
| spreading nonsense.
|
| > I've given up hope that this will be solved.
|
| Oh, me too. Now it is about managing your personal guilt, which
| you realize at some level, judging from your comments. For me,
| I am likely past my lifetime CO2 budget, due to just 5 years of
| transatlantic flights for work (plus 15 years of driving in the
| US). I can't undo the damage that I have done, and now I have
| both eyes open staring into the abyss.
|
| I guess you gotta find low-impact ways of enjoying life. I can
| recommend slacklining.
| [deleted]
| noasaservice wrote:
| > Smaller house, solar panels, don't drive, don't eat meat,
| and don't have kids. And don't vote for politicians who are
| busy spreading nonsense.
|
| I already live in a trailer. Solar wouldn't make sense since
| we have 2 big trees over our trailer providing us shade. Cuts
| down on AC in the hotter months (now veering on March).
|
| Not driving has been easy with WfH since last early March.
| I'm happy with that. I don't like driving anyways.
|
| My SO and I are a DINK - double income no kids. This is one
| of the largest climate change decisions that can be made at a
| human level.
|
| > And don't vote for politicians who are busy spreading
| nonsense.
|
| Oh, I don't. Nor do I have any preconceived notions that my
| opinion does matter either. I'll do my civic part, and vote
| when its due, do jury duty, etc. But my opinions do not
| matter at any scale other than household.
|
| I guess for me, it's not as much guilt, but foreboding. I
| know what the science says, and it'll be worse than what they
| say. I know I've done my share of pollution of many sorts,
| simply by using a vehicle, or flying.
|
| But this problem isn't solvable by me. Or my politicians.. Or
| even by the USA. This needs a worldwide drastic response at
| every level. And do I see that happening? Not in a hundred
| years - until it's catastrophically too late.
| megablast wrote:
| > These global climate change issues are the sum of all the
| work in this world, but the bulk of it is emitted by companies
| who do the cheapest thing.
|
| Who you are giving money to.
|
| Do you own a car?? Then you are destroying the planet.
| spoonjim wrote:
| You could live in 200 square feet. You could bathe with one
| bucket of room temperature water. You could use no air
| conditioning whatsoever. You could eat only vegetarian food.
| Etc etc.
|
| You won't, but if it comes down to human survival, forces will
| find a way to make you do it.
| shawnz wrote:
| This comment has gone grey but I think it is an important
| point. Our basic expectancies for what makes a comfortable
| life are higher than ever. Is that an ethical problem or just
| a result of more/better technology? I'm not really sure.
| _eht wrote:
| Not sure why you're being down voted-- This is the right
| answer. I see people getting mad at suppliers but they have
| yet to realize they would still please like their consumption
| supplied...
| titzer wrote:
| Keep in mind that it's 3C _average_ , over the entire globe, over
| a year. The locale, variance, seasonality all matter. Like,
| suppose that you are "lucky" in that your region gets only the
| average of 3C, so your year is 3C warmer on average, but that
| only happens during 3 months of the year, so you get 12C hotter
| in summer--basically, el fuego--or you get 12C in winter--
| basically, no more winter.
|
| A warmer winter can be catastrophic for forests in cold climates
| that depend on freezing temperatures to kill off invasive bugs.
| So an entire forest can be absolutely ruined by a damn beetle.
| endisneigh wrote:
| I fear the one-two punch of disproportionate use of energy
| coupled with rampant world-wide inequality (in both resources and
| income) result in those who caused the issues having little
| reason to care about the result.
|
| In a democratic country, how will a leader convince the
| population to care about this if the country is rich and
| currently is unaffected? Well, we're about to see how successful
| or unsuccessful they might be- so far, it's not looking great.
|
| Furthermore - in the classic phrase: reduce, reuse and recycle.
| The most important of the three is _reduction_ - how can we
| reduce consumption in a capitalist world that values mindless
| consumption and advertising to promote more mindless consumption?
|
| How many of us work for companies that directly or indirectly
| promote mindless waste of resources and endless consumption?
|
| This is not a TV show - a happy ending is not guaranteed.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| > In a democratic country, how will a leader convince the
| population to care about this if the country is rich and
| currently is unaffected
|
| Depends on the definition of "unaffected". I'm not sure that
| the Pacific Northwest, nor the Southwest nor the West would
| necessarily accept the "unaffected" label. Can they afford to
| smooth over the impact by using more energy & money? To some
| extent, certainly, but not entirely.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-23 23:00 UTC)