If they’re wrong then we’ll just be less reliant on dwindling resources that we often get from unstable regions.
THE HORROR
Pretty good discussion on this at LGM:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2017/05/the-evil-of-banality
Well, this again:
Sure, there are a lot of nice things things associated with moving away from carbon-based energy sources. However, I think there is a risk of painting a picture that is all sunshine and rainbows.
Realistic models for temperature changes in the 2-degrees-C ballpark call for VERY RAPID changes in CO2 emissions. That’s not going to come without some pain. Shutting down powerplants before their design lifetime, taking working vehicles off the road, etc. We are going to have to replace a lot of stuff a lot earlier, which means less money available for other things.
I think it’s fair to say we’ve already punted on that goal; none of the most expensive things are going to happen. But there are still a lot of consumption changes that could be encouraged right now by putting a price on carbon externalities. It won’t keep the temperature rise at less than 2C, but it might prevent us from having to abandon major coastal cities in the next century.
I know this post has some likes, and it is ok for this forum because we’re mostly on the same page. But this is extremely counter-productive. As in, this type of post and thought-stream is directly contributing to our lack of collective action on climate change. It’s literally a list of insults, followed by one big insulting admission. No wonder people are opposed to taking action on climate change.
Much better to stay on message - carbon is a major world issue, and we need to collectively work together to reduce carbon emissions while maintaining quality of life and lifestyle. Eliminating fossil fuel electricity and improvements to fuel economy and building efficiency aren’t insults to a rural way of life.
I don’t follow. A list of insults? The cartoon you’re replying to is a list of positive environmental goals.
Depends on your point of view. A negative read on that comic is:
Hey rural America! Here is a list of things you don’t believe in! Energy independence, preserve the rain forests, clean water and air, and healthy children!
Rural America: You think we don’t believe in that? Uh, get lost!
No really! You hate all that stuff! Cities are better for your kids. Not only that, we’re making this all up so we can force you to give up your way of life. Hand over your keys to the pickup truck and farm!
Just a different perspective on that comic.
I’ve got to say that’s an amazingly stilted interpretation. I don’t think it originates from the comic but the reader. You’re bringing a lot to the table. I mean, who says the dude objecting is ‘rural america’. Who are you giving up your way of life to? Smug city slickers? Dude, have you seen cities?
Seems like a political reaction to a crisis that isn’t political. Everyone, rural or urban, needs to give up modern luxury (ie driving, meat, petroleum based goods) for any hope of sustaining this planet’s viability for life. The blue state coastal dwellers aren’t enemies of your lifestyle, it ain’t like their (our) own lifestyles, and very lives, aren’t in peril.
I don’t think you’re following. I’m on board. The people that are opposed to climate change action aren’t. Part of the reason is that they’re resisting the parts that seem like a direct and unnecessary attack on their way of life. This comic widens that gap and perspective. It says “this might be a hoax!” I’m saying we, as climate change action supporters, shouldn’t open that door a crack, even as a joke. I’m saying I wouldn’t be surprised to see that comic on the screen at climate change denial conference, so it’s not helping us. Ok?
And also your wish list is absurd. We’re not all going to stay home. Fortunately there are viable solutions to climate change compatible with a growing economy.
I appreciate the insight, then, in attempting to provide perspective. Still. I’m not certain what you’re referring to as my ‘wishlist’. driving, animal farming, petroleum based products (ie plastic, for one)? That isn’t a wishlist. The absurd thing, is the notion that giving up a lot of aspects that are considered fundamental to modern life, is not a necessity. We can’t maintain our current quality of life and lifestyle if we’re to live at all. That probably means we’re all doomed, but it’s the reality, barring some scientific deus ex machina.
So noone can drive unless there’s a scientific deus ex machina?
I have great news for you, mono, the deus ex machina has already arrived in the form of drastically falling prices for solar panels and the increasing viability of batteries. Cars can be powered by the sun, the technology is already here, it will just take investment for the mass deployment of this technology to the shape the future economy. Sure CO2 emissions from the transport sector will disappear if everyone stopped driving (I wonder how goods will get from A to B), but thankfully there’s a way to do it that doesn’t involve the breakdown of human civilization.
I know it’s de rigueur to jump to extreme conclusions, but suffice it to say I meant drastic reductions in those lifestyle habits, and societal crutches, not total elimination.
I understand, but is that really true with current technology? If someone were to buy a solar panel, battery, and electric car right now they can drive however much as they like as far as the environment is concerned.
I just think the narrative “we need a significant change in government policy” is more productive than “this thing you like to do is evil stop it” (exaggeration). People should be able to act however they like in a next generation economy just as they do in this one, perhaps pay higher prices for meat or cars that are fueled by sun/wind instead of oil.
The amount of technological advancement already here is amazing it will just take money to have it save the planet.
Yeah, but that’s the problem. Greed will keep that from happening.
I don’t know what good/evil has to do with it. There’s smart or there’s a Darwin Award for humanity.
When exactly do you expect all the world’s goods and services are going to be viably transported by solar powered electric vehicles…? What do you see in government leaders suggesting they give even the slightest consideration to these urgent needs? To legislate encouragement of their adoption? The reality is a sick joke.
I get it, humans are stupid and greedy. The outlook is bleak especially since Trump got elected.
Despite that, I am more optimistic of collective action leading to sufficient investment in renewable energy that will avert climate disaster than I am of attempts to persuade the individuals of the world en masse to drastically change their lifestyles.
My only point was that it wasn’t true that there must be a drastic reduction in driving to achieve a world with a stable climate, even with current levels of technology. Whether a stable climate is going to be achieved whichever way is another conversation.
Well, it is true, since billions of solar powered vehicles. trains, trucks, planes are about as likely to materialize in a timely manner as cold fusion. It won’t happen. Even if it did, even that is not sufficient change by itself.
I’m unfortunately about equally optimistic towards those two paths.
Defeatism is a great justification for collective non-action.
On the other hand, elimination of fossil fuel electricity sources (especially coal), and drastically reduced transportation emissions through fuel economy and electrification are attainable at current technology and prices.
The world has an enormous capacity for absorbing CO2, we’re just above that.
One of the reasons the far-right insists climate change is not real is that others say they have to give up driving, meat, and literally every possession they own because they’re all petroleum derived. Not a tenable position.
Also a minor positive note for consumerism, one of the biggest carbon sinks is durable goods (furniture, housing etc.).
Edited for tone.
Wait, does the US not have daytime and night time electricity rates?
I was just listening to the 99% Invisible on solar panels and feeding back to the grid, and they were talking about differential pricing for electricity like it was some revolutionary thing. For that matter, they were speculating about having things in your house that show “here’s what the price of electricity is right now”, like it had never been done before. I have one of those things! So does nearly everyone in the UK. To be fair, it’s not real time wholesale market pricing, as the podcast was suggesting, but still.