botle t1_je7tsr3 wrote on March 30, 2023 at 1:05 AM

Reply to comment by scoofy in Melting Antarctic ice predicted to cause rapid slowdown of deep ocean current by 2050 by Lakerlion

Nobody's talking about stopping the economy.

People are complaining that huge damage is done to the environment for the sake of squeezing out every little last percentage point of economic growth.

Climate change will probably have a far bigger negative effect on the economy than the changes that we need to do to limit climate change.

The issue is the tragedy of the commons.

Agreeing to certain restrictions on emissions we will all benefit long term, but short term anyone that ignores the restrictions will benefit personally.

scoofy t1_je7uzpd wrote on March 30, 2023 at 1:14 AM

> huge damage is done to the environment for the sake of squeezing out every little last percentage point of economic growth.

I mean. I look around. Where I live, the main source of GHGs are from personal vehicles, gas stoves, and animal agriculture. All of which there are already very reasonable alternatives to, that people just don't want. There are some "big economy" things there, but they aren't nearly as big as just people driving gasoline fueled cars.

Obviously that's not the same everywhere, but when i sit and look very hard at the problem, blaming some ephemeral "economy" or marginal economic growth isn't whats causing the problem. It's every day human decisions. It's shit I've given public comment for. Nothings changing because even most people in these threads don't realized the impact if things they consider essential to their lives.

botle t1_je84exq wrote on March 30, 2023 at 2:27 AM

All those trucks and personal vehicles you're seeing around you already follow environmental and safety standards that make them more expensive and emmit less.

If vehicles that were cheaper but worse for the environment could be made and sold legally they would be, but a communal democratic decision has been made to limit the legal limits on emissions for new vehicles.

The responsibility is too often put on the individual to do the right thing, and it distracts from the actually significant decisions that need to be made on a political level.

The significant change can only happen as a communal democratic decision. By us choosing a government that's willing to set stricter limits on emissions, introduce carbon emissions trading and requirements on blended fuels. Many parts of the western world don't even have a useful public transportation system that people can use to reliability get to work and everywhere else they need.

This problem cant be solved by righteous individuals going out and buying an expensive electric car, recycling or going vegan.

It's a communal problem that requires a communal decision, and as you can see in the article you posted, the emissions.have been going down successfully, just not fast enough.

There are companies and think tanks out there that want to put the responsibility on you, the individual, to discourage you from voting in a way that would potentially decrease their profit, but increase the profit of other upcoming industries and be better for all of us.

scoofy t1_je8631t wrote on March 30, 2023 at 2:40 AM

If we can get a carbon cap and trade system in place, I'd be ecstatic. I just think it's naive that people think it's big corp lobbying congress to keep that from happening. People would freak out.

When I'm making these statements, I'm not saying that "this is the result of individual decisions" it's just that all these individual decisions affect policy.

I was celebrating when gas prices exploded in CA this last year, assuming more people would switch to renewables. Literally the opposite happened. The gov't started mailing out checks to people to help them afford gasoline. It's ridiculous. Everyone wants it both ways. They want carbon tax/trade, but they also want low gas prices. You can't have both.

botle t1_je86v3m wrote on March 30, 2023 at 2:47 AM

>If we can get a carbon cap and trade system in place, I'd be ecstatic.

Most western countries do have one in place so it can happen in California too.

>I just think it's naive that people think it's big corp lobbying congress to keep that from happening. People would freak out.

I am not too familiar with your local situation. What I was trying to say is that every time this is presented as an individual decision and sacrifice instead of as a communal one, it discourages change.

>I was celebrating when gas prices exploded in CA this last year, assuming more people would switch to renewables. Literally the opposite happened. The gov't started mailing out checks to people to help them afford gasoline.

The last year has been a bit of an exception because of the war and inflation. The EU has felt it even more I think despite being less dependent on private vehicles.