Climate change and human responsibility

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Are you implying that transport of food is 6% of global GHGs?

Because that's wrong. It's maybe 2%, using the most generous estimates.

And if you analyze the carbon intensity of the transportation chain to get food to your table, you'll find most of it is incurred by the trucked legs, not by the shipping. Driving your car to the grocery store ends up being significant because you are moving such a small mass of food relative to mass transportation.

So within that 2%, a significant portion of it will still be there to truck it in from your local farm and then for you to drive it home from the farmer's market.

Your argument is that we should optimize for a portion of 2% of global GHGs instead of optimizing for 20% of global GHGs, by producing as efficiently as possible.

I'm not considering any of your ethics arguments, because just as you said we should focus on producing local food more efficiently, I'll just throw out that we should focus on producing foreign food more ethically. Use it as a platform to raise the global standard of living and workers rights. That's a lot more noble than some efficiency projects that are not affordable for most of the world.

How do we raise the standard of living in foreign countries? Tell China to be good to be people? Is that realistic?

Also, it's really easy to manipulate these GHG counts in favor of whatever food source you want to promote. For example, we've seen figures for cattle showing both net neutrality and extreme production.

With the issue of shipping, you're just using the shipping itself. What about the production of this ships? Their maintenance? To maintain the workers? When you're dealing with an entire industry, like global shipping, you're looking at a long supply chain of consumption, not just a simple calculation of emissions.

The notion that we can't do things locally more efficiently is just wrong.

[MoneyGuy]

Originally Posted by GGG

No one actually cares about global warming enough to sacrifice standard of living. We are just waiting for technology to catch up and bail us out. It also needs to be the right kind of tech as nuclear or geo engineering don’t count.

That’s an incorrect generalization. I’m willing to sacrifice and I’m sure I’m not the only one. I just want to make sure that my only is being used appropriately and not pi$$ed away by stupid politicians like Trudeau and his gang of incompetents and thieves. If you said “most people don’t care,” that I’d agree with. They’d better start caring as this is a crisis that will kill and displace many millions if we don’t act.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

That’s an incorrect generalization. I’m willing to sacrifice and I’m sure I’m not the only one. I just want to make sure that my only is being used appropriately and not pi$$ed away by stupid politicians like Trudeau and his gang of incompetents and thieves. If you said “most people don’t care,” that I’d agree with. They’d better start caring as this is a crisis that will kill and displace many millions if we don’t act.

Not trusting the people in power to enact the required change has the same outcome as not caring.

You are right that I should have stated most rather than no one.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Congratulations on ignoring the whole point of what I wrote and not addressing anything in the post. Well done.

The point was that an American politician suggested that the United States should not do anything until China does something.

Now do you want to try again or do you want to only address whom the American politician was talking to at the time?

Oi.

The ####ing point is the biggest carbon footprints need to do something, including and especially Greta and her corporate friends. Everyone is responsible, something you are obviously incapable of grasping.

Imagine if everyone consumed the resources Greta does, now explain to me why I should take advice from her? Instead of preaching to me why I'm bad for the planet SHOW ME how to be better by example. If you can't do that then STFU.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by zamler

The ####ing point is the biggest carbon footprints need to do something, including and especially Greta and her corporate friends. Everyone is responsible, something you are obviously incapable of grasping.

Imagine if everyone consumed the resources Greta does, now explain to me why I should take advice from her? Instead of preaching to me why I'm bad for the planet SHOW ME how to be better by example. If you can't do that then STFU.

Something like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage...rg?wprov=sfti1

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by blankall

The notion that we can't do things locally more efficiently is just wrong.

I'm not saying that. I'm saying the notion that the most efficient solution available is optimized local production is not necessarily true.

We shouldn't get caught up in the dogma of "local", we should aim for the most efficient solutions to problems, whatever that may be.

Look at the results of recycling dogma. There is nuance to these issues.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the COVID pandemic has pretty conclusively proven that we as a society can't be trusted to behave in a responsible manner that protects our collective interests and survival. There's going to need to be a major re-ordering of social and economic priorities/ideologies if we're to actually have any hope of getting out of this crisis.

Maybe natural disasters kill enough people we get lucky and climate change solves itself? If we go back to 4 billion people worldwide, emission should drop considerably, especially if most of the worlds coastal cities are under water.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

Something like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyage...rg?wprov=sfti1

If everyone sailed on a carbon fiber yacht instead of flying commercial do you think our carbon footprint would go down? Carbon fiber composites are made from propane and petroleum.

BTW it took a team flying back and forth to sail the yacht back home.

[DownInFlames]

Isn't the fact that it's nearly impossible to be carbon-neutral kinda her point? She's trying to get the industrialized world to change its ways and she can't do it just by staying home. She needs to travel to give her public speeches and that just can't be done now without consuming fossil fuels.

And don't forget she's still just a teenage girl so you can't expect her to have all the answers. Add on the fact that even if she's a hypocrite that doesn't make what she's saying wrong. If you're attacking her it's because you can't refute her message.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

Isn't the fact that it's nearly impossible to be carbon-neutral kinda her point? She's trying to get the industrialized world to change its ways and she can't do it just by staying home. She needs to travel to give her public speeches and that just can't be done now without consuming fossil fuels.

You don't find it concerning she is using the very technology she says is dooming our planet? I think we all know at this point our lifestyles mean we ruin the environment so if you're saying it is about raising awareness don't think that is necessary.

And don't forget she's still just a teenage girl so you can't expect her to have all the answers. Add on the fact that even if she's a hypocrite that doesn't make what she's saying wrong. If you're attacking her it's because you can't refute her message.

What is she saying exactly? Don't be a human that lives a western lifestyle? The harsh reality is you, me, Greta and almost everyone else is not going to give up our way of life. It's not going to happen.

[DownInFlames]

Originally Posted by zamler

You don't find it concerning she is using the very technology she says is dooming our planet? I think we all know at this point our lifestyles mean we ruin the environment so if you're saying it is about raising awareness don't think that is necessary.

Honestly, I have no idea what her carbon footprint is. Other than travel what is she doing that's so bad? I would give her credit for any people who've changed their lifestyles because of her message. That has to be worth something.

What is she saying exactly? Don't be a human that lives a western lifestyle? The harsh reality is you, me, Greta and almost everyone else is not going to give up our way of life. It's not going to happen.

That's exactly what she's saying and your point aligns perfectly with mine from when I bumped this thread. We're all waiting for everyone else to make the tough choices so we don't have to.

[Icantwhisper]

Originally Posted by zamler

You don't find it concerning she is using the very technology she says is dooming our planet? I think we all know at this point our lifestyles mean we ruin the environment so if you're saying it is about raising awareness don't think that is necessary.

What is she saying exactly? Don't be a human that lives a western lifestyle? The harsh reality is you, me, Greta and almost everyone else is not going to give up our way of life. It's not going to happen.

Exactly, and if everyone in the world was lucky enough to live a western lifestyle we would need 6 planets of resources, luckily there will always be more have nots than haves 😔

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by zamler

You don't find it concerning she is using the very technology she says is dooming our planet? I think we all know at this point our lifestyles mean we ruin the environment so if you're saying it is about raising awareness don't think that is necessary.

What is she saying exactly? Don't be a human that lives a western lifestyle? The harsh reality is you, me, Greta and almost everyone else is not going to give up our way of life. It's not going to happen.

So what is your point? Just admit defeat and wait for the world to go to hell?

[zamler]

Originally Posted by DownInFlames

Honestly, I have no idea what her carbon footprint is. Other than travel what is she doing that's so bad? I would give her credit for any people who've changed their lifestyles because of her message. That has to be worth something.

What is her message? Shame on you, we've stolen her childhood, massive corporations are killing the planet. But she is just as responsible by consuming what we all consume. Did anyone ever tell her that?

That's exactly what she's saying and your point aligns perfectly with mine from when I bumped this thread. We're all waiting for everyone else to make the tough choices so we don't have to.

Which means the solution is not to be Greta and heap shame on everyone, that solves NOTHING. The goods and services we consume has to come from renewable, non polluting sources.

I have said probably dozens of times at this point I think solar should be on every house in many locations. For whatever reason that gets shouted down. It won't work, it's worse than burning oil, it poisons the planet. I don't think any of that is true, but it's odd that the same people who tend support Greta's message also shout down any attempt at solutions.

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

So what is your point? Just admit defeat and wait for the world to go to hell?

Sigh, my point is exactly the ####ing opposite. I want to talk about actual solutions not grandstanding. Seems some here only want to talk about political sides nothing else.

[PeteMoss]

She's had actionable items. Don't fly. Suing governments for their inaction. Pressuring business to move away from fossil fuels, etc.

I do agree with your general idea however.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by zamler

The ####ing point is the biggest carbon footprints need to do something, including and especially Greta and her corporate friends. Everyone is responsible, something you are obviously incapable of grasping.

Imagine if everyone consumed the resources Greta does, now explain to me why I should take advice from her? Instead of preaching to me why I'm bad for the planet SHOW ME how to be better by example. If you can't do that then STFU.

You still fail.

Me: "A U.S. politician told Greta Thunberg that the United States should not take action on climate change until China reduces their emissions."
You: "YOU SAID THE NAME Greta Thunberg! I think I'll go off half-cocked and have a rant about Greta Thunberg! I win the Internets! Woot!"

-=-=-=-=-

Did you mean you want me, personally, to show you how to be better by example? You are welcome to come visit my place. Or you can PM me and I can do a Zoom call. I'm far from perfect, but I think I have a fair setup here. This has always been an important issue to me and many of my life choices have been based on climate change, including my wife and I deciding not to have children. Neither of us have a car; we bicycle everywhere. We use the clothesline out back to dry clothes and virtually everything in the house is second-hand (appliances, furniture, clothes). We do have a long way to go; and certainly are not perfect but we are trying to do our best and continue to do better in the future. Given that we both work from home, both needing a computer for our job, we have been saving for solar panels, but for now we are paying the extra for Bullfrog Power. Again, I'm not sure your "show me" was meant to be directed towards me, but I'd be happy to talk.

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by zamler

I want to talk about actual solutions not grandstanding. Seems some here only want to talk about political sides nothing else.

Well, it is political. For all the choices we can make as individuals, we can't drive this thing. Your everyday citizen Joe isn't producing most of the CO2, it is businesses. Businesses that need to make choices that maximize profits. And to do that they need to do whatever is cheapest for them. There has to be a political will to make policies that will ensure that all segments of our society are willing and able to make changes to decrease GHG emissions.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

You still fail.

Why would I want to discuss anything further with you when you open with this? Give me a reason.

Me: "A U.S. politician told Greta Thunberg that the United States should not take action on climate change until China reduces their emissions."
You: "YOU SAID THE NAME Greta Thunberg! I think I'll go off half-cocked and have a rant about Greta Thunberg! I win the Internets! Woot!"

This is just pathetic. I get it you're better than me. Carry on.

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

Well, it is political. For all the choices we can make as individuals, we can't drive this thing. Your everyday citizen Joe isn't producing most of the CO2, it is businesses. Businesses that need to make choices that maximize profits. And to do that they need to do whatever is cheapest for them. There has to be a political will to make policies that will ensure that all segments of our society are willing and able to make changes to decrease GHG emissions.

We all buy what these corporations produce. The problem is us, all of us.

[belsarius]

The whole "what about them" argument is so bad faith, especially in regards to Greta who actually does try to follow what she preaches.

The problem is that we all still live in the world in 2021. There arn't a lot of carbon friendly options available and we need to make due with what we have. There is a lot of finger pointing at the advocates to practice what you preach, and you know what, who cares? Does it change the message? Greta isn't saying "you" the individual isn't doing enough, she is saying "you" the collective isn't doing enough.

We all have to drive internal combustion engines still, get our energy from burning fossil fuels and use products made with processes that release carbon. It is our current way of life, and it has to change. You need to use what's available now to further change in the future.

Does Greta own oil company stocks and makes her money while jet setting around? No? Because that would be hypocritical. Using the transportation methods at her disposal in our current world isn't being a hypocrite as much as you want it to be.

Its just a deflection from the real issues and attacking the messenger instead of listening to the message. We as a collective need to change, I don't feel shame for driving an ICE car, because an electric is unaffordable to me. Greta wants the countrys, the governments, the companies with the money and power to enact change, to do it, and its our job to put pressure on them to do it.

No one is saying you are a bad person for owning an iphone, or driving a car, or eating a burger. That's just people putting up a strawman to deflect from a message they don't want to hear. What is being said is that the world is tipping, we are in some deep ####, and the people causing the problem are the ones going to be hurt the least from it.

I'm not worried about food scarcity in Canada, but there are billions of others that will be seriously affected. While we sit with the highest carbon footprint per capita in the G7 and do nothing but offer platitudes, millions of people will die from the changing climate we are causing.

Greta is using her carbon footprint to get out there, to put pressure on changing the status quo, so that they are better options and she won't need to use the carbon she is now. If you take it as personal shame, fine thats your choice. But that's not the message. Force change in governments, make them act, stop buying high carbon intensive goods. If we all used what carbon footprint we have to force the issue like Greta does, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by belsarius

The problem is that we all still live in the world in 2021. There arn't a lot of carbon friendly options available and we need to make due with what we have.

According to Greta Thunberg this is not good enough and I completely agree with her.