I went down quite a rabbit hole after reading this comment (not about the end of existence, mostly about Peter Higgs and the Higgs Boson). Anyway, thanks for that. The dude was way smarter than me.
This was a problem. We just acted to ban CFCs, which solved the problem. Now the ozone hole is recovering. I wouldn’t say it turned out not to be a problem though. The human race just had the brains and corporation to come together and deal with it.
You missed the point. CFCs were mostly manufactured by a tiny number of manufacturers in a few specific industries. Things like refrigerants, spray cans, etc. Governments could easily regulate the handful of CFC producers. Alternative products were quickly found that didn't require people to make major changes in their lives.
The climate change problem is a completely different animal. Billions of vehicles and fossil dependent supply chains sustain the lives of most of the human race. It's taken decades of investment to even develop alternatives for these, let alone completely switching the fleets over. Plus electricity generation. Plus heating. Plus emissions from agriculture and land use. And on and on. Fossil fuels are not just some minor industrial compounds we can phase out and replace. We built an entire civilization around them. And that system is what's currently keeping everyone alive.
We as a species are nature's ultimate pyromaniacs, and we've been tasked with the problem of solving the global coordination problem of the regulation of fire itself.
Look
... Mostrar más
You missed the point. CFCs were mostly manufactured by a tiny number of manufacturers in a few specific industries. Things like refrigerants, spray cans, etc. Governments could easily regulate the handful of CFC producers. Alternative products were quickly found that didn't require people to make major changes in their lives.
The climate change problem is a completely different animal. Billions of vehicles and fossil dependent supply chains sustain the lives of most of the human race. It's taken decades of investment to even develop alternatives for these, let alone completely switching the fleets over. Plus electricity generation. Plus heating. Plus emissions from agriculture and land use. And on and on. Fossil fuels are not just some minor industrial compounds we can phase out and replace. We built an entire civilization around them. And that system is what's currently keeping everyone alive.
We as a species are nature's ultimate pyromaniacs, and we've been tasked with the problem of solving the global coordination problem of the regulation of fire itself.
Looking at the ozone situation and lamenting we haven't solved climate change is like someone lamenting they can't single-handedly take on a million man army, even though their combat prowess was proven when they stepped on an ant.
People just lump both problems into the category of "global environmental issues" and assume they're even in the same universe of difficulty.
Thats not at all what i meant, and by no means i am belittling the issue. But the dependency is the the point. All official action is actively trying to not improve the situation and just continue running fullspeed against the wall. It is baffling to me how much influence anything fossil fuel related has to convince so many stakeholders to rather burn everything than accept losses. Then again maybe thats just capitalsm at heart.
No idea, just don't say I am comparing the two as the same. Thanks for the clarification about the CFC producers being small fry, that makes sense. But rejecting the idea of any sort of change in terms of fossil fuels is just fucking stupid, and very common in my experience. And i'm talking about shit like german car producers advocating for their super optimized ICE over shitty woke batteries. Or neglecting the possibility of heating a house without burning shit because infrastructure isn't in place at this very moment
The news stories blew the issue way out of proportion. There were claims that anything with a computer in it would stop working at midnight. Cars would crash, planes would fall out of the sky, etc. Y2K was really just a finance and IT problem. The fact is most electronic devices of the time, even ones with a clock, didn't know what the year was and couldn't be effected by a short-sighted engineering problem.
My friend told me there was a shit ton of work done to find and fix every instance if the bug, and they managed to do it, which is why things kept going smoothly.
I've also heard that in some places virtually nothing was done and no problems occurred anyway.
I think I may be from a different timeline or something, I swear I had 97 in my head and looked it to be sure... Maybe I'm just losing my mind. (Although I was going for birth)
Esta entrada fue editada (lunes, 7 de septiembre de 2026, 16:04)
It might be very country specific. But gambling houses.
They started to proliferate in my country around 10 years ago, and they said they were going to be the end of our youth. I, myself, went to a lot of actions to stop them.
We failed to stop them.
And 10 years after... Nothing happened. There are no mesurable increase in social problems due to the massive increase in gambling I was told it was going to happen. Also the houses themselves are always empty, people gamble mostly online anyway. But they put so much pressure on us to stop the opening of the physical buildings and cause rhe closure of the ones already opened.
I'm in principle against them still. Just because I don't like people making money out of people addicted to gambling. But I'm also kind of mad that I spent to much time, effort, and even got sued for what we tried to do to stop them, just for them not really being as much as a threat as I was told they were. And my efforts would have been much better spent elsewhere.
At least I learned a very valuable lesson.
Esta entrada fue editada (lunes, 7 de septiembre de 2026, 7:24)
We tried so hard and still were unable to stop any opening, cause any closure or push the legislative changes we wanted (limiting the amount of gambling houses that could be opened). They just opened as many houses as they liked.
My lesson was to not follow anything blindly even if it was said by people I respect. Always analyze by myself and be skeptical of everything.
Esta entrada fue editada (lunes, 7 de septiembre de 2026, 7:59)
But do you think it's possible you contributed to a vibe or attitude amongst your peers that these things were not that cool? Or had otherwise indirect influence?
I've picketed businesses before and people completely avoid going anywhere near you. Even after we are gone, there is a bad taste on that business.
If it had been accepted with no opposition, do you think it would have been the same in the end?
Always analyze by myself and be skeptical of everything.
You're saying all this with hindsight. Given the information that was (or would have been if you'd looked for it) available at the time, could you really have anticipated the outcome?
There are some that were fixed, but fixed with great effort. The hole in the ozone layer for example.
My final answer will be overpopulation. Personally though I think the population should be about 1 billion just so I don't feel quite as much existential dread at my own insignificance.
TV was becoming too good, it was becoming impossible to keep up with all the great stuff coming out. Good thing we managed to avert that, now theres maybe 1 good season of tv every year.
Ever since semaglutide came on the market, it seems like we're slowly getting a handle on it.
2. Overpopulation in Africa/Asia
Automation is causing them to stop having children as more jobs require higher education and there's less jobs around altogether.
3. Poverty in Africa/Asia
Related to overpopulation. China has lifted itself up completely. India is also doing better every year. Famines in African nations have severely been reduced these days and all of them are now war related.
[edit]I'm getting some downvotes. Is anything wrong here?
Esta entrada fue editada (lunes, 7 de septiembre de 2026, 14:44)
I have not heard one good thing about India. Please share. As far as I can tell only China has blossomed and it's incredibly striking. India? ... I guess capitalism just doesn't work. Let's check back in maybe... 100 years? How long does it take for a capitalist nation to build itself up? 500 years?
How long does it take for a capitalist nation to build itself up?
Idk, look at development of Japan or Korea... Not saying that the culture in India is similar... at all... but capitalism doesn't seem to be there blocker here.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 8 de septiembre de 2026, 13:46)
Down votes probably because they're less of a problem than expected they would be 15 years ago but still problematic. Very large regions in Africa/Asia still deal with overpopulation and poverty although India and China have made some massive progress in the last 15 years. For semaglutide it's still early days, nobody expected there to be an actual general drug against obesity but more long term studies are still needed.
This was averted by mass production of fertilizer through fossil fuels.
I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in the ass.
Certainly not dangerous to have massive monocultures what could easily be wiped out by disease or heat waves. I'm sure all those people will be able to keep living when we aren't making as much fertilizer with the destruction of our economies.
We are producing about four times as much food as we consume.
Solar panels wind turbines and nuclear energy have proven to solve all of our issues if we actually put effort into implementing them.
Humanity destroying the entire planet would happen even without food scarcity. Every problem we've been presented with has had a solution, but we just didn't implement it.
Well, we haven't reached the peak yet, tho. Afaik global population is going to peak at around 10 billion people somewhere in the 60s. We will see how much land climate change will render unusable for farming until then as well. So a food shortage is still not completely off the table, I think. Well, at least if we continue to use most of the crops to feed livestock, and not us humans directly.
And if not food, but access to enough fresh water willl probably be a huge issue in the future.
That was avoided by "the green revolution" i.e. new ways of producing fertilizers. It just kicked the can down the road and made everything worse honestly.
Climate change. We all thought we were gonna have to cut back on consumption, use less fossil fuels, and change our infrastructure entirely to renewable energy.
Thankfully it's not a problem anymore at all. Our wise leaders just decided to stop talking about it and instead just decided we'd speed the process up, burn fossil fuels for glorified chat bots while draining our fresh water resources.
Thankfully it's not a problem anymore. Because a problem would imply it's something that has a solution. We're far past that point. We're essentially watching this generation of our oligarchs committing a mass global genocide of the upcoming generations.
Problem solved.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 8 de septiembre de 2026, 8:51)
Don't worry places like the Himalayas are only warming five times faster than the global average leading to apocalyptic mudslides that killed 1000 people in Nepal.
Climate change. We all thought we were gonna have to cut back on consumption, use less fossil fuels, and change our infrastructure entirely to renewable energy.
I feel like we were expecting this because we were expecting someone to be our parent and force us to make the changes, when in fact nobody is externally enforcing that we stay on a safe climate path, and we are stuck waiting for our own societal self-discipline.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 8 de septiembre de 2026, 13:43)
You say we, like there is anything that any amount of reusable tote bags and driving less could have done. The damage being done to our climate is primarily being done at a corporate and industrial level. People hate hearing how Capitalism is the bad guy, but profits kept being put over environmentalism. If your company wants to be competitive with companies that don't give a shit, your options are to fight the federal government to implement regulations (expensive and time consuming), or to simply also stop giving a fuck (great next quarter, very easy).
In general, yes, the western world was under the false assumption that the leaders it had were, at the very least, aligned in the interest of self preservation. Many are still living with this false belief today.
I think it's less about societal self discipline though; and more about the incompatibility of the societal hierarchy with working to solve the problem of climate change. The contradictions between the ruling and working class are in conflict when it comes to the priority of climate change. Climate change is an opportunity for further wealth concentration for the ruling class of our society; and that same ruling class has "drank their own Koolaid" in the idea of American and Western exceptionalism.
Capitalism is incapable of addressing the problems of climate change. It's like trying to put out a fire and bringing a bulldozer instead of a firetruck.
I'll never forget when the U.S. state of North Carolina made a policy disallowing any government official or documentation to reference or acknowledge the existence of climate change. It was their response to a state study noting the effect of rising sea levels on their coastal towns.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 8 de septiembre de 2026, 15:58)
Convicted Criminal Florida Senator Rick Scott did that when he was the Convicted Criminal Governor of Florida. I believe that he was the first to pull that nonsense, and then everyone else started copying him.
Did I mention that he's a Convicted Criminal? I like to remind people that Rick Scott is a Convicted Criminal as often as possible, because Convicted Criminal Florida Senator Rick Scott HATES when anyone mentions that Rick Scott is a Convicted Criminal.
Sure. I'm not an expert and I'm only a single person. But I am smart enough to look and see what is working.
China is reaching renewable energy power surplus. Meaning their production of solar panels, windmills, nuclear power, etc is reaching a point at which it will exceed the power consumption of their entire country.
This is in "energy potential". Meaning, it includes the production of renewable energy products, their energy production over their lifetime, and accounting for grown in demand over that time period. It's a little bit different than saying that they are running on entirely renewable energy. They are not. They are unfortunately being forced to burn more coal right now due to the Iran war. A lot of their production of renewable energy is sold outside of China. I wanted to clarify though, since this is an important distinction.
The point being. China, has gone from a preindustrial peasant society post WW2, victims of a genocide, on the level of the Holocaust, from the Japanese fascist; to, now, being the first country in the world that is capable of
... Mostrar más
Sure. I'm not an expert and I'm only a single person. But I am smart enough to look and see what is working.
China is reaching renewable energy power surplus. Meaning their production of solar panels, windmills, nuclear power, etc is reaching a point at which it will exceed the power consumption of their entire country.
This is in "energy potential". Meaning, it includes the production of renewable energy products, their energy production over their lifetime, and accounting for grown in demand over that time period. It's a little bit different than saying that they are running on entirely renewable energy. They are not. They are unfortunately being forced to burn more coal right now due to the Iran war. A lot of their production of renewable energy is sold outside of China. I wanted to clarify though, since this is an important distinction.
The point being. China, has gone from a preindustrial peasant society post WW2, victims of a genocide, on the level of the Holocaust, from the Japanese fascist; to, now, being the first country in the world that is capable of replacing their entire energy production with renewable energy.
Whatever China is doing. We need to learn FROM THAT and quickly. We need to be mimicking their economic planning, at the very least, around the control of natural resources and energy production. Because there is no amount of cold war 2 propaganda that should overpower the threat of mass climate based genocide.
We don't have to be "pro China", we don't have to "be exactly like China". But we are currently pretending that there is not a major world power that IS planning for and capable of running a modern and cutting edge technological society that is capable of producing energy almost entirely without greenhouse gas production.
We don't need to pretend there is some "future silicon valley tech" that will save us. There is literally already an example to follow.
If every country was producing renewable energy as China currently is, the world would have literally removed its dependence on fossil fuels.
Edit: Renewable Energy production is projected to exceed Chinas entire energy consumption by 2033 currently. Their industry is growing renewable production at 4x the rate that their domestic consumption is growing.
Esta entrada fue editada (martes, 8 de septiembre de 2026, 20:50)
I don't remember any of the specifics anymore but it boils down to: Trees and plants died in masses, scientists and the general population got together and we changed what caused it.
We may have to go back to having it for a while though to put a break on climate change. For all the bad that acid rain caused, at least it cooled the world
I work for a company that, among other things, helps monitor NOx and SOx emissions at power plants and other polluting facilities. Trust me, this is still something we're still very worried about and barely keeping a handle on
Really? I thought it was mostly solved by regulations that require filters at the industrial sites (and aren't those used in Diesel cars, too?). Actually, what happens with the gunked-up filter material? Can the captured sulfur and nitrogen be used? I think you can use nitrogen as a fertilizer?
Brkdncr
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
Malica
in reply to Brkdncr • • •NocturnalMorning
in reply to Malica • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
tias
in reply to Brkdncr • • •NocturnalMorning
in reply to Brkdncr • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
Carlos Solís
in reply to SubArcticTundra • •Asklemmy reshared this.
UnpopularCrow
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
ximtor
in reply to UnpopularCrow • • •Why does that sound like such an absurd and faraway fantasy nowadays
UnpopularCrow
in reply to ximtor • • •isleepinahammock
in reply to ximtor • • •ximtor
in reply to isleepinahammock • • •isleepinahammock
in reply to ximtor • • •You missed the point. CFCs were mostly manufactured by a tiny number of manufacturers in a few specific industries. Things like refrigerants, spray cans, etc. Governments could easily regulate the handful of CFC producers. Alternative products were quickly found that didn't require people to make major changes in their lives.
The climate change problem is a completely different animal. Billions of vehicles and fossil dependent supply chains sustain the lives of most of the human race. It's taken decades of investment to even develop alternatives for these, let alone completely switching the fleets over. Plus electricity generation. Plus heating. Plus emissions from agriculture and land use. And on and on. Fossil fuels are not just some minor industrial compounds we can phase out and replace. We built an entire civilization around them. And that system is what's currently keeping everyone alive.
We as a species are nature's ultimate pyromaniacs, and we've been tasked with the problem of solving the global coordination problem of the regulation of fire itself.
Look
... Mostrar másYou missed the point. CFCs were mostly manufactured by a tiny number of manufacturers in a few specific industries. Things like refrigerants, spray cans, etc. Governments could easily regulate the handful of CFC producers. Alternative products were quickly found that didn't require people to make major changes in their lives.
The climate change problem is a completely different animal. Billions of vehicles and fossil dependent supply chains sustain the lives of most of the human race. It's taken decades of investment to even develop alternatives for these, let alone completely switching the fleets over. Plus electricity generation. Plus heating. Plus emissions from agriculture and land use. And on and on. Fossil fuels are not just some minor industrial compounds we can phase out and replace. We built an entire civilization around them. And that system is what's currently keeping everyone alive.
We as a species are nature's ultimate pyromaniacs, and we've been tasked with the problem of solving the global coordination problem of the regulation of fire itself.
Looking at the ozone situation and lamenting we haven't solved climate change is like someone lamenting they can't single-handedly take on a million man army, even though their combat prowess was proven when they stepped on an ant.
People just lump both problems into the category of "global environmental issues" and assume they're even in the same universe of difficulty.
ximtor
in reply to isleepinahammock • • •Thats not at all what i meant, and by no means i am belittling the issue. But the dependency is the the point. All official action is actively trying to not improve the situation and just continue running fullspeed against the wall. It is baffling to me how much influence anything fossil fuel related has to convince so many stakeholders to rather burn everything than accept losses. Then again maybe thats just capitalsm at heart.
No idea, just don't say I am comparing the two as the same. Thanks for the clarification about the CFC producers being small fry, that makes sense. But rejecting the idea of any sort of change in terms of fossil fuels is just fucking stupid, and very common in my experience. And i'm talking about shit like german car producers advocating for their super optimized ICE over shitty woke batteries. Or neglecting the possibility of heating a house without burning shit because infrastructure isn't in place at this very moment
tangentism
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
Trying2KnowMyself [they/them/their/theirs/themself]
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •LemsGhost
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
StaticFalconar
in reply to Carlos Solís • • •Carlos Solís likes this.
Asklemmy reshared this.
naught101
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •like this
Carlos Solís likes this.
SubArcticTundra
in reply to naught101 • • •BlueÆther
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •Y2K
Oh shit, what year did you just say it was?
Chl0r0f0rm_Angel
in reply to BlueÆther • • •isleepinahammock
in reply to Chl0r0f0rm_Angel • • •cryowatt
in reply to Chl0r0f0rm_Angel • • •Chl0r0f0rm_Angel
in reply to cryowatt • • •none [none/use name]
in reply to BlueÆther • • •My friend told me there was a shit ton of work done to find and fix every instance if the bug, and they managed to do it, which is why things kept going smoothly.
I've also heard that in some places virtually nothing was done and no problems occurred anyway.
tangentism
in reply to BlueÆther • • •RobotToaster
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •like this
Infrapink likes this.
MML
in reply to RobotToaster • • •thelardboy
in reply to MML • • •AngryCommieKender
in reply to MML • • •Dolly was born in 1996. She died in 2003
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolly_(sheep)
Dolly (sheep) - Wikipedia
Contributors to Wikimedia projects (Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.)MML
in reply to AngryCommieKender • • •Repple (she/her)
in reply to AngryCommieKender • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
daniskarma
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •It might be very country specific. But gambling houses.
They started to proliferate in my country around 10 years ago, and they said they were going to be the end of our youth. I, myself, went to a lot of actions to stop them.
We failed to stop them.
And 10 years after... Nothing happened. There are no mesurable increase in social problems due to the massive increase in gambling I was told it was going to happen. Also the houses themselves are always empty, people gamble mostly online anyway. But they put so much pressure on us to stop the opening of the physical buildings and cause rhe closure of the ones already opened.
I'm in principle against them still. Just because I don't like people making money out of people addicted to gambling. But I'm also kind of mad that I spent to much time, effort, and even got sued for what we tried to do to stop them, just for them not really being as much as a threat as I was told they were. And my efforts would have been much better spent elsewhere.
At least I learned a very valuable lesson.
none [none/use name]
in reply to daniskarma • • •Is it possible you were successful?
What was the lesson?
daniskarma
in reply to none [none/use name] • • •None of the objectives were met.
We tried so hard and still were unable to stop any opening, cause any closure or push the legislative changes we wanted (limiting the amount of gambling houses that could be opened). They just opened as many houses as they liked.
My lesson was to not follow anything blindly even if it was said by people I respect. Always analyze by myself and be skeptical of everything.
LemsGhost
in reply to daniskarma • • •none [none/use name]
in reply to daniskarma • • •But do you think it's possible you contributed to a vibe or attitude amongst your peers that these things were not that cool? Or had otherwise indirect influence?
I've picketed businesses before and people completely avoid going anywhere near you. Even after we are gone, there is a bad taste on that business.
If it had been accepted with no opposition, do you think it would have been the same in the end?
You're saying all this with hindsight. Given the information that was (or would have been if you'd looked for it) available at the time, could you really have anticipated the outcome?
CurlyWurlies4All
in reply to daniskarma • • •CarrotsHaveEars
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •That my job is too easy. I having too much time to play video games, reading, travelling, watching TV, dating.
That my job pays too good. I having so much money that I not knowing what to buy.
That AI is too well developed and be morally used that I having nothing to do. (Well it kind of is given how easily I could be unemployed)
FoundFootFootage78
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •There are some that were fixed, but fixed with great effort. The hole in the ozone layer for example.
My final answer will be overpopulation. Personally though I think the population should be about 1 billion just so I don't feel quite as much existential dread at my own insignificance.
Trying2KnowMyself [they/them/their/theirs/themself]
in reply to FoundFootFootage78 • • •isleepinahammock
in reply to Trying2KnowMyself [they/them/their/theirs/themself] • • •Gorillatactics [none/use name]
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •folaht
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •1. Obesity pandemic
Ever since semaglutide came on the market, it seems like we're slowly getting a handle on it.
2. Overpopulation in Africa/Asia
Automation is causing them to stop having children as more jobs require higher education and there's less jobs around altogether.
3. Poverty in Africa/Asia
Related to overpopulation. China has lifted itself up completely.
India is also doing better every year.
Famines in African nations have severely been reduced these days and all of them are now war related.
[edit]I'm getting some downvotes.
Is anything wrong here?
SubArcticTundra
in reply to folaht • • •India's gradual rise out of poverty is truly impressive.
I mean Iv've never been there, but I've been hearing good things.
dropdrip
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •SubArcticTundra
in reply to dropdrip • • •Idk, look at development of Japan or Korea... Not saying that the culture in India is similar... at all... but capitalism doesn't seem to be there blocker here.
hexagonwin
in reply to folaht • • •to me those 3 all seems like valid problems still.
obesity may be solved in a few decades but is still ongoing.
overpopulation in india etc is still a big issue combined with poverty..
a large part of china(mainland) is still suffering in great poverty. places like shanghai/beijing are a very small minority number wise.
dropdrip
in reply to folaht • • •folaht
in reply to dropdrip • • •Or everyone else is. How well do you do on this test?
upgrader.gapminder.org/t/sdg-world-un-goals/c/short-intro
Important stuff most people get wrong
upgrader.gapminder.orgCaveman
in reply to folaht • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
atomicorange
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •SubArcticTundra
in reply to atomicorange • • •Whats_your_reasoning
in reply to atomicorange • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
CurlyWurlies4All
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •This is going back a bit longer than 15 years but the myth of the Population Bomb was pretty fucking wrong.
It predicted the mass starvation of hundreds of millions of people due yo food production not keeping up with population growth in the 1970s.
HasturInYellow
in reply to CurlyWurlies4All • • •This was averted by mass production of fertilizer through fossil fuels.
I'm sure that won't come back to bite us in the ass.
Certainly not dangerous to have massive monocultures what could easily be wiped out by disease or heat waves. I'm sure all those people will be able to keep living when we aren't making as much fertilizer with the destruction of our economies.
Asklemmy reshared this.
geneva_convenience
in reply to HasturInYellow • • •We are producing about four times as much food as we consume.
Solar panels wind turbines and nuclear energy have proven to solve all of our issues if we actually put effort into implementing them.
Humanity destroying the entire planet would happen even without food scarcity. Every problem we've been presented with has had a solution, but we just didn't implement it.
blackberry28
in reply to CurlyWurlies4All • • •Well, we haven't reached the peak yet, tho. Afaik global population is going to peak at around 10 billion people somewhere in the 60s. We will see how much land climate change will render unusable for farming until then as well. So a food shortage is still not completely off the table, I think. Well, at least if we continue to use most of the crops to feed livestock, and not us humans directly.
And if not food, but access to enough fresh water willl probably be a huge issue in the future.
zod000
in reply to CurlyWurlies4All • • •wheezy
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •Climate change. We all thought we were gonna have to cut back on consumption, use less fossil fuels, and change our infrastructure entirely to renewable energy.
Thankfully it's not a problem anymore at all. Our wise leaders just decided to stop talking about it and instead just decided we'd speed the process up, burn fossil fuels for glorified chat bots while draining our fresh water resources.
Thankfully it's not a problem anymore. Because a problem would imply it's something that has a solution. We're far past that point. We're essentially watching this generation of our oligarchs committing a mass global genocide of the upcoming generations.
Problem solved.
dropdrip
in reply to wheezy • • •Mrkawfee
in reply to dropdrip • • •Asklemmy reshared this.
SubArcticTundra
in reply to wheezy • • •I feel like we were expecting this because we were expecting someone to be our parent and force us to make the changes, when in fact nobody is externally enforcing that we stay on a safe climate path, and we are stuck waiting for our own societal self-discipline.
lenabee
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •wheezy
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •In general, yes, the western world was under the false assumption that the leaders it had were, at the very least, aligned in the interest of self preservation. Many are still living with this false belief today.
I think it's less about societal self discipline though; and more about the incompatibility of the societal hierarchy with working to solve the problem of climate change. The contradictions between the ruling and working class are in conflict when it comes to the priority of climate change. Climate change is an opportunity for further wealth concentration for the ruling class of our society; and that same ruling class has "drank their own Koolaid" in the idea of American and Western exceptionalism.
Capitalism is incapable of addressing the problems of climate change. It's like trying to put out a fire and bringing a bulldozer instead of a firetruck.
callouscomic
in reply to wheezy • • •BarneyPiccolo
in reply to callouscomic • • •Convicted Criminal Florida Senator Rick Scott did that when he was the Convicted Criminal Governor of Florida. I believe that he was the first to pull that nonsense, and then everyone else started copying him.
Did I mention that he's a Convicted Criminal? I like to remind people that Rick Scott is a Convicted Criminal as often as possible, because Convicted Criminal Florida Senator Rick Scott HATES when anyone mentions that Rick Scott is a Convicted Criminal.
Zoop
in reply to BarneyPiccolo • • •Goodlucksil
in reply to wheezy • • •myszka
in reply to wheezy • • •wheezy
in reply to myszka • • •Sure. I'm not an expert and I'm only a single person. But I am smart enough to look and see what is working.
China is reaching renewable energy power surplus. Meaning their production of solar panels, windmills, nuclear power, etc is reaching a point at which it will exceed the power consumption of their entire country.
This is in "energy potential". Meaning, it includes the production of renewable energy products, their energy production over their lifetime, and accounting for grown in demand over that time period. It's a little bit different than saying that they are running on entirely renewable energy. They are not. They are unfortunately being forced to burn more coal right now due to the Iran war. A lot of their production of renewable energy is sold outside of China. I wanted to clarify though, since this is an important distinction.
The point being. China, has gone from a preindustrial peasant society post WW2, victims of a genocide, on the level of the Holocaust, from the Japanese fascist; to, now, being the first country in the world that is capable of
... Mostrar másSure. I'm not an expert and I'm only a single person. But I am smart enough to look and see what is working.
China is reaching renewable energy power surplus. Meaning their production of solar panels, windmills, nuclear power, etc is reaching a point at which it will exceed the power consumption of their entire country.
This is in "energy potential". Meaning, it includes the production of renewable energy products, their energy production over their lifetime, and accounting for grown in demand over that time period. It's a little bit different than saying that they are running on entirely renewable energy. They are not. They are unfortunately being forced to burn more coal right now due to the Iran war. A lot of their production of renewable energy is sold outside of China. I wanted to clarify though, since this is an important distinction.
The point being. China, has gone from a preindustrial peasant society post WW2, victims of a genocide, on the level of the Holocaust, from the Japanese fascist; to, now, being the first country in the world that is capable of replacing their entire energy production with renewable energy.
Whatever China is doing. We need to learn FROM THAT and quickly. We need to be mimicking their economic planning, at the very least, around the control of natural resources and energy production. Because there is no amount of cold war 2 propaganda that should overpower the threat of mass climate based genocide.
We don't have to be "pro China", we don't have to "be exactly like China". But we are currently pretending that there is not a major world power that IS planning for and capable of running a modern and cutting edge technological society that is capable of producing energy almost entirely without greenhouse gas production.
We don't need to pretend there is some "future silicon valley tech" that will save us. There is literally already an example to follow.
If every country was producing renewable energy as China currently is, the world would have literally removed its dependence on fossil fuels.
Edit: Renewable Energy production is projected to exceed Chinas entire energy consumption by 2033 currently. Their industry is growing renewable production at 4x the rate that their domestic consumption is growing.
myszka
in reply to wheezy • • •Crotaro
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •Acidic rain.
I don't remember any of the specifics anymore but it boils down to: Trees and plants died in masses, scientists and the general population got together and we changed what caused it.
SubArcticTundra
in reply to Crotaro • • •Crotaro
in reply to SubArcticTundra • • •Phoenixz
in reply to Crotaro • • •sexual_tomato
in reply to Crotaro • • •Crotaro
in reply to sexual_tomato • • •Actually, what happens with the gunked-up filter material? Can the captured sulfur and nitrogen be used? I think you can use nitrogen as a fertilizer?