Climate change and human responsibility

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Right, but it's all kind of the same thing if we are looking at electrifying everything. The challenge is to eliminate emissions, so you need to look at all consumption.

Not really, no. For heat and transport we'd need at most only 30% of the same account if energy due to combustion being so inefficient

[Fuzz]

Gas furnaces are far more efficient than 30%, I think mine is 95%? Irrelevant anyway, as the link I provided said this about it:

Global primary energy consumption by source

Primary energy is calculated based on the 'substitution method' which takes account of the inefficiencies in fossil fuelproduction by converting non-fossil energy into the energy inputs required if they had the same conversion losses as fossilfuels.

[Brendone]

Originally Posted by Barnes

You are ignorant to the pace the players that will actually make a difference are currently at though. Stand still cause you think that everyone else is. They are not.

Not saying we stand still. If the global goal is net zero by 2050 (I only use that since 2050 and 2035 seem to be the latest talking points), then make strides towards that date, and if there are reasonable opportunities you improve on that. It feels like we’re racing to the party early just so we can say we did it, as we sit there alone.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Brendone

Not saying we stand still. If the global goal is net zero by 2050 (I only use that since 2050 and 2035 seem to be the latest talking points), then make strides towards that date, and if there are reasonable opportunities you improve on that. It feels like we’re racing to the party early just so we can say we did it, as we sit there alone.

It may feel that way to you, but we're behind almost all of the G20 in policy and performance on climate. Our goals are fine but policy wise we're quite awful. We're not leading in any category

[Azure]

The richest one percent of the global population are responsible for the same amount of carbon emissions as the world's poorest two-thirds, or five billion people, according to an analysis published Sunday by the nonprofit Oxfam International.

While fighting the climate crisis is a shared challenge, not everyone is equally responsible and government policies must be tailored accordingly, Max Lawson, who co-authored the report, told AFP.

Within country analyses also painted very stark pictures.

For example, in France, the richest one percent emit as much carbon in one year as the poorest 50 percent in 10 years.

Excluding the carbon associated with his investments, Bernard Arnault, the billionaire founder of Louis Vuitton and richest man in France, has a footprint 1,270 times greater than that of the average Frenchman.

https://phys.org/news/2023-11-world-...on-bottom.html

But, but, but I thought if I recycle and take out another mortgage to buy an EV that I am really helping the planet!

Shocker, I know that the same people who fly to climate change summits with their private jets and tell the rest of the world how we should live are actually the ones making this mess worse to begin with.

[Fuzz]

You might be shocked to know that that includes a lot of everyday normal Canadians.

According to Credit Suisse, individuals with more than $1 million in wealth sit in the top one per cent bracket.

https://www.oxfam.ca/news/richest-1-...ast-two-years/


So ya, I fully intend on being in the richest 1% if I want to retire one day, so that's gonna be me. Doing your part yet? Or not bothering because you are only in the richest 3%?

[Harry Lime]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You might be shocked to know that that includes a lot of everyday normal Canadians.



https://www.oxfam.ca/news/richest-1-...ast-two-years/


So ya, I fully intend on being in the richest 1% if I want to retire one day, so that's gonna be me. Doing your part yet? Or not bothering because you are only in the richest 3%?

You're lucky you're talking to CP, because here we are all well on our way to $1M liquid.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You might be shocked to know that that includes a lot of everyday normal Canadians.



https://www.oxfam.ca/news/richest-1-...ast-two-years/


So ya, I fully intend on being in the richest 1% if I want to retire one day, so that's gonna be me. Doing your part yet? Or not bothering because you are only in the richest 3%?

It’s gets even worse. The cited article claimed top 1% of the world. So that’s around 65,000 salary after tax.

[Fuzz]

I'm not sure if we should all be suddenly celebrating this awareness we ARE the 1%, or worried about the upcoming purge. Sliver? How's that bunker going?

[Azure]

The point being that if you want to throw around stupidity like 'oh per capita we are worse than the rest of the world', then its only fair to discuss out of 'per capita', who is actually the problem, and whose actions wouldn't make a difference.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Azure

The point being that if you want to throw around stupidity like 'oh per capita we are worse than the rest of the world', then its only fair to discuss out of 'per capita', who is actually the problem, and whose actions wouldn't make a difference.

Everyone’s actions make a difference. That’s how making a difference works when everyone is contributing to a problem.

And, according to the article, unless you’re poor you are part of the problem… so people could stand to generally buck up and figure out their #### instead of whining about everyone else all the time and shrugging their shoulders.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

You might be shocked to know that that includes a lot of everyday normal Canadians.



https://www.oxfam.ca/news/richest-1-...ast-two-years/


So ya, I fully intend on being in the richest 1% if I want to retire one day, so that's gonna be me. Doing your part yet? Or not bothering because you are only in the richest 3%?

A million really isn’t that much money when you think of real estate prices in Van / Toronto. Just because you one day will have a mil doesn’t mean you will be I the 1%. Only the top 1% will be in the top 1%.

Anyways, a bit of a derail.

Obviously everyone doing their part helps out, the higher earners can make a larger impact because they are higher emitters, that’s a no brainer.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

A million really isn’t that much money when you think of real estate prices in Van / Toronto. Just because you one day will have a mil doesn’t mean you will be I the 1%. Only the top 1% will be in the top 1%.

Anyways, a bit of a derail.

Obviously everyone doing their part helps out, the higher earners can make a larger impact because they are higher emitters, that’s a no brainer.

Well that's the point though, isn't it? Azure is saying we are not the problem, but if you are a middle class Canadian, you are easily in the top 5% globally and clearly have the means to adjust relative to the other 95% of humanity.

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well that's the point though, isn't it? Azure is saying we are not the problem, but if you are a middle class Canadian, you are easily in the top 5% globally and clearly have the means to adjust relative to the other 95% of humanity.

Ys, that’s the point I made in my last paragraph.

[Leondros]

So unless you are homeless in North America your carbon footprint is much larger than the rest of the world... News at 11

It effectively states what we already know:

- Own a car? Carbon
- Commute to work? Carbon
- Live in a home and need to use heat/AC? Carbon
- Consume more than what is needed to keep you alive? More carbon than is needed to survive
- Vacation? Carbon
- Pooped in a toilet? Carbon

Most of the world's population is still dealing with the basic needs of food, clean water, sanitation, and shelter. On a per person basis it is glaringly obvious that the North American life style is not sustainable. Even the European model is carbon intensive and North Americans are far worse.

[puckedoff]

In my opinion its more likely that the lower income 50% of the world increases their wealth and standard of living over the next few decades, increasing their GHG output than the top 1% or 10% decreasing their GHG output materially.

I am not saying we should not try to be carbon conscious in our day to day lives, but to me there is no feasible outcome that doesn't see world temperatures continue to rise. Rather than governments taxing (ordinary) people in order to provide rebates on EVs (for wealthy people, at least so far) for example, they should be using tax revenue to prepare for the inevitable climate related disasters.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Leondros

So unless you are homeless in North America your carbon footprint is much larger than the rest of the world... News at 11

It effectively states what we already know:

- Own a car? Carbon
- Commute to work? Carbon
- Live in a home and need to use heat/AC? Carbon
- Consume more than what is needed to keep you alive? Carbon
- Vacation? Carbon
- Pooped in a toilet? Carbon

Most of the world's population is still dealing with the basic needs of food, clean water, sanitation, and shelter. On a per person basis it is glaringly obvious that the North American life style is not sustainable. Even the European model is carbon intensive and North Americans are far worse.

Yeah but we shouldn’t feel the need to recycle cuz jets and yachts or something.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Well that's the point though, isn't it? Azure is saying we are not the problem, but if you are a middle class Canadian, you are easily in the top 5% globally and clearly have the means to adjust relative to the other 95% of humanity.

From the article.

The income threshold for being among the global top one percent was adjusted by country using purchasing power parity—for example in the United States the threshold would be $140,000, whereas the Kenyan equivalent would be about $40,000.

I'd imagine the Canadian # is similar to the American #, and less than 3% of Canadians make over $150k per year. 8% of Canadians make over $100k per year.

Also, what is middle class Canadian? Not what it used to be with inflation.

Either way, pretty clear that throwing out stupidity like 'per capita we are just as bad', when its pretty clear that if you dig into the capita, that there is actually about 5-10% of the population that are creating the emissions, while the majority of the people in Canada don't actually have the means or ability to make a difference. Add in financial means to make changes (ability to buy EV, put solar on house, etc, etc), and its even less.

But boo hoo, Canada is so bad per capita, everyone should be ashamed.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Leondros

So unless you are homeless in North America your carbon footprint is much larger than the rest of the world... News at 11

It effectively states what we already know:

- Own a car? Carbon
- Commute to work? Carbon
- Live in a home and need to use heat/AC? Carbon
- Consume more than what is needed to keep you alive? More carbon than is needed to survive
- Vacation? Carbon
- Pooped in a toilet? Carbon

Most of the world's population is still dealing with the basic needs of food, clean water, sanitation, and shelter. On a per person basis it is glaringly obvious that the North American life style is not sustainable. Even the European model is carbon intensive and North Americans are far worse.

This is false, and clearly pointed out by the article.

It is only the top 1% as measured per country, and not measured on a global scale that are a major source of emissions with the ability to make a difference. Most people living in North America can't do jack #### to make any difference to emissions rates.

Which of course brings me back to my earlier point, we need to be driving emissions reductions with technological advancements at a higher level. I.E. power generation, lower CO2 producing cement, building science, heating & cooling advancements, etc.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

From the article.

I'd imagine the Canadian # is similar to the American #, and less than 3% of Canadians make over $150k per year. 8% of Canadians make over $100k per year.

Also, what is middle class Canadian? Not what it used to be with inflation.

Either way, pretty clear that throwing out stupidity like 'per capita we are just as bad', when its pretty clear that if you dig into the capita, that there is actually about 5-10% of the population that are creating the emissions, while the majority of the people in Canada don't actually have the means or ability to make a difference. Add in financial means to make changes (ability to buy EV, put solar on house, etc, etc), and its even less.

But boo hoo, Canada is so bad per capita, everyone should be ashamed.

So much nonsense. You talk as if people don't have many opportunities in their daily lives to make better decisions. I look around and see the roads filled with inefficient SUV's and pickups, when they used to be in sedans and hatchbacks while living in massive inefficient 3 story vinyl palaces on the edges of the city and can recognize immediately that you are immensely wrong.