Climate change and human responsibility

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Azure

I actually don't think that people would have to sacrifice that much.

The only sacrifice is in the diet part and if you like eating meat, just buy it from the farmers market, or from a 'grass-fed' source. That is something we should all be doing anyways, and there should be laws to mandate as much local grown food as possible.

Factory farmed meat is the problem.

I agree with Itse 100%. All those things are doable within 10 years.

Cars to transit or bikes alone is a big sacrifice for a lot of people in Calgary.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

That's a lot a sacrifice Itse which I agree would be good. No government would survive proposing that. People are not making adjustments.

Electronics at least 4 years? We live in an Instagram world. A running up personal debt world.

As I said earlier, the majority of people are not going to support a cause that involves sacrifice. I could give a bunch of Calgary examples.

Telling companies to make products that last is not a sacrifice to anyone except the companies. Most people would love it if they could buy a dishwasher that lasts 10 years or a pair of jeans that they know would last at least two years.

The way electricity is produced doesn't affect almost anyone directly. It's not a sacrifice to anyone unless you own a coal plant or work there.

Driving an electric vehicle isn't significantly different from driving another vehicle, once you get used to it.

Planting trees does not include sacrifices to almost anyone personally. (In fact it could create a lot of jobs because it's somewhat labor intensive.)

The "people" against this are mostly just companies with a lot of propaganda money to spend. They have a vested interest in making it sound like cutting down on carbon emissions would be this huge sacrifice, but it's just not true.

That's the ridiculous part about this. People talk as if we need to do something really hard, but we really don't.

We need to do something that's quite easy, that we know how to do, that we know why we need to do it, that would save huge amounts of money and hassle in the long run and would affect relatively few people directly. Especially compared to how many people are affected and will be affected by climate change.

We just haven't done it because we are lazy, stupid and gullible.

It's pathetic, and rightfully shamed by teenagers.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by zamler

This would be government way overstepping their bounds, mandating to such a high degree how companies choose to make their products. Can't support this.
.

No its not. It's extremely low level regulation, much less restricting than any standard safety regulation.

It's also already really common. EU already has this type of regulation for many products. Just extend the deadlines.

Also, I think your priorities are kind of messed up if you worry more about government regulation than the destruction of the environment.

Either you support governments taking action or you support inaction.

Free market capitalism will not solve this one on its own, and will in fact fight tooth and nail for the freedom to destroy the planet.

Consumer level action does nothing, because consumers have extremely limited ability to affect anything.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Itse

No its not. It's extremely low level regulation, much less restricting than any standard safety regulation.

It's also already really common. EU already has this type of regulation for many products. Just extend the deadlines.

Also, I think your priorities are kind of messed up if you worry more about government regulation than the destruction of the environment.

Either you support governments taking action or you support inaction.

Free market capitalism will not solve this one on its own, and will in fact fight tooth and nail for the freedom to destroy the planet.

Consumer level action does nothing, because consumers have extremely limited ability to affect anything.

Basically you're saying only government can solve this. Given how amazingly incompetent and wasteful governments tend to be no way that will work. Also you lost me with this -

Either you support governments taking action or you support inaction.

I hate absolute statements especially in reference to this incredibly complex issue.

[Aleks]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Cars to transit or bikes alone is a big sacrifice for a lot of people in Calgary.

You can't automatically make the assumption that everyone works at the same location and same time every day. Many of us have no choice or option to take alternatives due to work hours, varying locations, etc. My work start locations can literally be 2-300km apart on 2 different days and at different hours. That is just in my industry, there are countless others that are the same.


I don't think its fair when people who live a 10 minute walk from work give people who don't a hard time. Thats just not an option for everyone

[redforever]

You can already buy electronics and other products that last a long time. You just have to be willing to pay for them.

For instance, a Miele dishwasher. I bought one in 1999, it was white. We did a renovation in 2006 and changed to stainless steel so I gave the white one to my daughter. She just retired that dishwasher a year and a half ago.

The one from 2006 is still running, not one repair either.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Aleks

You can't automatically make the assumption that everyone works at the same location and same time every day. Many of us have no choice or option to take alternatives due to work hours, varying locations, etc. My work start locations can literally be 2-300km apart on 2 different days and at different hours. That is just in my industry, there are countless others that are the same.


I don't think its fair when people who live a 10 minute walk from work give people who don't a hard time. Thats just not an option for everyone

Yes absolutely agree. This is what I'm saying.

The above arguments say we should invest in transit and reduce roads or penalize car usage

It's not that simple. It's a lot of sacrifice for a lot of people.

If you have kids, it's almost a non starter.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by redforever

You can already buy electronics and other products that last a long time. You just have to be willing to pay for them.

For instance, a Miele dishwasher. I bought one in 1999, it was white. We did a renovation in 2006 and changed to stainless steel so I gave the white one to my daughter. She just retired that dishwasher a year and a half ago.

The one from 2006 is still running, not one repair either.

Appliances yes and that's maybe where we should start
Maybe even cars. But cars are status symbols.

But you cant use a TV, computer, or cell phone from 2006.

[zamler]

Canada’s Energy Future 2017: Energy Supply and Demand Projections to 2040

Spoiler!

Canadian fossil fuel consumption in the Higher Carbon Price Case is 8% lower than in the Reference Case, and 13% lower in the Technology Case by 2040.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Itse

Either you support governments taking action or you support inaction.

Free market capitalism will not solve this one on its own, and will in fact fight tooth and nail for the freedom to destroy the planet.

Consumer level action does nothing, because consumers have extremely limited ability to affect anything.

Disagree entirely. Almost every single purchase decision we make is more impactful than the single vote we cast every ~4 years. The market actually responds directly to our day-to-day decisions.

As individuals, we have far more power to effect change with our wallets than with our ballots. In either case, nothing done by an individual matters, but IMO a critical mass changing consumption habits will do far more than a critical mass changing voting habits.

[redforever]

Well this is depressing. No wonder consumers are depressed with recycling in its present form. Only one company actually recycled the material, in BC of all provinces too.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/m...-box-1.5299176

[nik-]

Originally Posted by redforever

Well this is depressing. No wonder consumers are depressed with recycling in its present form. Only one company actually recycled the material, in BC of all provinces too.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/m...-box-1.5299176

The actual rate of material that is truly recycled is abysmal. Less than 10%. Recycling is a mirage.

edit: yeah, that 9% Canadian rate is the same as the US rate.

[Winsor_Pilates]

I had no idea recycling was complete BS like that; that sucks.

[Azure]

I think I've posted this on here somewhere before.

I know dozens of companies that simply dispose of their cardboard instead of making any effort at all to recycle it.

Reason is there is no simple way to recycle. Perhaps it is easy for individuals, but for companies will large scale waste, it is tough.

Canada's recycling program is a mess for sure.

[81MC]

That is why Reduce is the first R, and recycle is the last.

[accord1999]

Originally Posted by Itse

- Shut down all coal mines. Build nuclear energy and renewables to replace them. All the necessary technology exists for this. Sure it's expensive, but way cheaper than dealing with climate change. Easily doable within a decade.

Coal is the #2 source of energy worldwide and especially important in China and India, the two countries accounting for ~63% of global consumption.

Even with China's ability to significantly add new hydro, nuclear, wind and solar, it would take more than twenty years to replace coal based on 2018 numbers.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Disagree entirely. Almost every single purchase decision we make is more impactful than the single vote we cast every ~4 years. The market actually responds directly to our day-to-day decisions.

No it doesn't.

Nobody ever wanted appliances that break in 5 years. Everybody wants appliances that they just buy and forget about, like the ones their parents might have. But that's not as profitable. That's why even Miele's don't last these days. 20 years ago, sure. These days, the "long lasting" brands last the same 3-5 years as everything else. Almost all appliances are also now deliberately made impossible or at least difficult to repair.


Nobody wants clothes to not last, but it's more profitable that they don't. Especially for women there are no lasting clothes available. It's basically all garbage synthetic materials, unless you have time to shop around for hippie clothes that you won't be able wear in work anyway because they look unprofessional.

Pure cotton jeans are rarely even made anymore, you have to specifically hunt for a pair. And that pair will still not last as long as the ones your dad used to buy. Same for shoes. Even sheets don't last. My mom has sheets that are 40 years old. The last sheets I bought lasted two years, and they weren't the cheapest kind.

Electric cars are not going to take over while we subsidize fossil fuels. Large scale dietary changes are not going to happen while we subsidize eating meat.

There is no way to vote with your wallet for "green electricity". It does not actually affect what new power plants are built, or speed up closing coal plants. As long as someone buys electricity from coal plants, those things are not going everywhere.

You can't vote with your wallet to plant trees. Not very practically anyway.

It's also a complete fantasy that voting with your wallet could tackle something like carbon emissions.

For that to work, you'd need basically everyone to change their spending habits, keep updating their knowledge level on carbon emissions to be aware of what are the low emission choices, and you need everyone to keep doing this every day for the rest of their lives.

Or you could get 51% of the people to vote for major changes for a few years, and then you could have a government that puts in regulations which takes care of the same without everybody needing to constantly self-police their own spending habits.

What you suggest is so hard I call it a fantasy. Never going to happen.

What I'm suggesting is a much, much easier way of getting more done, faster and with much less effort needed from most people. It's much easier to get someone to vote for something than it is to get them to watch what they buy forever and ever. I know I would much rather have someone put in some regulation that would free me to buy what I want without having to think about my carbon footprint all the damned time, simply because of personal convenience.

The only thing "voting wíth your wallet" does affect is general opinion, which is important in eventually getting the votes in.

That's why everyone who cares needs to do it. It does not actually affect carbon emissions in a measurable way, but it does play it's part in the attempt of trying to get a majority of voters and politicians behind this thing for at least a while, until they get distracted by something like terrorism or refugees or American Idol.

[Fuzz]

^
To one of your points, you can choose to vote with your wallet on green energy, at least in Calgary.



https://www.enmax.com/home/electrici...en-your-energy

[Salt Water Cowboy #10]

Originally Posted by powderjunkie

Disagree entirely. Almost every single purchase decision we make is more impactful than the single vote we cast every ~4 years. The market actually responds directly to our day-to-day decisions.

As individuals, we have far more power to effect change with our wallets than with our ballots. In either case, nothing done by an individual matters, but IMO a critical mass changing consumption habits will do far more than a critical mass changing voting habits.

This is the way to change. Waiting for some bumbling politician to force corporations to change takes years if it happens at all.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

^
To one of your points, you can choose to vote with your wallet on green energy, at least in Calgary.



https://www.enmax.com/home/electrici...en-your-energy

Does that shut down coal plants, preferably in less than a decade? Because if it doesn't, then it doesn't really do much.

We don't need more green energy. We need less fossil energy.