Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fastone1911 t1_ja8n2jz wrote

And India is opening 80 new airports in the next 5 years, despite air travel being an environmental nightmare.

Great.

6

grchelp2018 t1_ja8t7zo wrote

Better to live in the future for 10 years than 50 years in the stone age. Developing nations aren't going to give up quality of life improvements.

6

fastone1911 t1_ja9bcjz wrote

No one will be living in the future when the entire biosphere collapses and temperatures at 2deg above pre-industrial.

1

Bakanyanter t1_jaag7ub wrote

So you're asking for developing countries to stop developing? That's dumb, sorry.

2

fastone1911 t1_jaahqif wrote

I'm simply stating a fact that developing countries developing will doom the world. The US, Europe etc already living with air travel, heating/cooling, cars, meat-rich diets, high-consumption etc has caused this much damage, how do you think the world will fare with 8 billion living at that level? The answer is total systems collapse.

And don't quote the 100 companies statistic, since those companies are what facilitate our lifestyles.

1

Bakanyanter t1_jaam46e wrote

>I'm simply stating a fact that developing countries developing will doom the world. >The US, Europe etc already living with air travel, heating/cooling, cars, meat-rich diets, high-consumption etc has caused this much damage

The US and Europe live in luxury with air travel, AC everywhere, many cars like you said but even the developing countries have to bear the brunt of climate change as well. So why should only the west live comfortably? Do you think the ozone hole formed in Africa and Antarctica was because of people in Antarctica? Obviously no, countries have had bad environmental effects in other countries since long time now.

>how do you think the world will fare with 8 billion living at that level? The answer is total systems collapse.

I agree, but that doesn't mean we stop uplifting people. It only means that we should experiment and keep researching new technologies that reduce our impact on developing while developing. For example, China is still going to create 300+ nuclear plants, and is the leader in green energy capacity developed per year.

If you are so concerned about development and environment, there is an easy way if you are EU/America. Just reduce your development and go back to 1970s, but obviously they won't reduce airports or their ACs or whatever, they are already used to it.

2

fastone1911 t1_jaapqam wrote

My entire point is that NO ONE should be living this high consumption lifestyle, but your point is that EVERYONE should.

Your way, everyone dies. My way, everyone lives simpler lives, but at least the biosphere doesn't collapse by 2060.

Also, you don't seem to understand that even green growth is an ecological disaster. There's no point getting emissions to 0 if we've destroyed ecosystems to do it. We've totally overextended in terms of ground water, top soil, fishing stocks, novel entities, land-system change and biochemical flows. These planetary boundaries, if continuously overshot, are enough to destroy us, even if emissions go to zero and atmospheric CO2 goes back to 350ppm.

1

Bakanyanter t1_jaau1uh wrote

>My entire point is that NO ONE should be living this high consumption lifestyle, but your point is that EVERYONE should.

Then you should complain about the west having X airports already instead of complaining about India building 80 more.

>Your way, everyone dies.

No, maybe we fuck up the environment very badly but we'll find a way to live. We're tenacious fucks.

>Also, you don't seem to understand that even green growth is an ecological disaster.

So you are indeed advocating for developing countries to stop developing. Sorry but not going to happen. Climate change is important but secondary compared to growth.

Obviously you are right in the sense that if tomorrow everyone stops living high maintenance life then the earth would be much better off but developing nations are simply not going to stop developing.

1

fastone1911 t1_jaazgiy wrote

If you think collapse is secondary to growth your shit is gonna get rocked by the next 20-30 years.

There’s nothing else to say to you.

Good luck.

−1

Bakanyanter t1_jab46h5 wrote

>If you think collapse is secondary to growth your shit is gonna get rocked by the next 20-30 years.

Life in luxury for 30 years is better than shit in 60 years...but I am not pessimistic like you. We figured out Ozone hole and covered it up and recovered it, we will figure out a way to sustain ourselves. My home is almost fully solar powered, my nation is on its way to be carbon neutral by 2070, etc.

2

fastone1911 t1_jab4sy7 wrote

you're ecologically illiterate

2

Bakanyanter t1_jabewqc wrote

You're a doomer. You disregard entire humanity's effort and the fact that we have faced multiple crises and have overcame them. You think there is only one solution and that is simply not the truth. We will overcome this as well.

2