12 ms·

It's not really enough to read and upvote, but I'm at a loss as to what I can personally can do about this. So in the spirit of the askhn "how would you turn a

It's not really enough to read and upvote, but I'm at a loss as to what I can personally can do about this. So in the spirit of the askhn "how would you turn around Twitter" - let's apply the same thinking to this: "how would you fix the oceans "? There must be some practical steps that one or many of the hn audience can execute?

greglindahl 10y ago
Become a vegetarian. Not only will you not contribute to the fish market, but you'll also reduce the amount of fertilizer flowing into the ocean.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  To make a dent I suspect becoming a vegetarian isn't enough - you'd have to become an effective-evangelical vegetarian. So, given that fear and shock tactics are failing - how do I convince the world (or a sizeable portion of it) to become vegetarian? I heard a podcast recently about a guy working to produce real meat from plant matter. This would probably be an effective solution. By spending time otherwise used for side projects perhaps I could help bring the cost of production down to below that of animal-meat? Know of anything I can work on to help?
  - greglindahl 10y ago
    [ I have no idea why people are downvoting me, so I'll just remove this comment. ]
    - anotherturn 10y ago
      I think you missed the point of the comment... "fear and shock tactics" have been applied to me wrt climate change, vegetarianism, etc. But all they seem to have done is desensitize me. Hence my saying that they do not work. I'm exploring whether there are things that I (and the rest of the HN audience) can do to make a dent. Right now my measure of effectiveness and productivity is almost exclusively related to dev work. It'd be worthwhile to find a way to expand this to include more nebulous objectives - and having some practical things to work on seems a step in the right direction?
      - greglindahl 10y ago
        I wasn't suggesting fear and shock tactics, and I agree that they don't work. My suggestion was quite different.
        anotherturn 10y ago
        You seem to have redacted your comment - but if I recall correctly your suggestion was to go ahead and evangelize but asserted that I would fail because I mentioned "shock and fear tactics"?
      - 7952 10y ago
        Fear and shock dont work. Shame is the solution. Work to make bad actions socially unacceptable.
        anotherturn 10y ago
        Kind of like the star rating system from Black Mirror?
  - prawn 10y ago
    I think someone would see more success convincing people to eat less meat rather than eat no meat. e.g., make red meat a special occasion thing rather than an almost nightly occurrence. This could work a little at a personal level, but any larger campaign is going to come up against industry groups with more funding and no financial reason to care about much of the environment. I don't know about the US, but in Australia, there are very strong campaigns promoting lamb consumption, for example. It's tied very effectively, through marketing, to our national identity as part of Australia Day.
    - greglindahl 10y ago
      "eat less meat" has been tried and doesn't appear to work that well. In the US, there are lots of industries in which producers of beef, eggs, pork have to pay $$ to a marketing board that buys advertising. Needless to say, they won't buy advertising that says "buy higher quality X" or "eat less X!" The government is for it and the courts have upheld being forced to pay into it, so, there you have it.
  - anigbrowl 10y ago
    The best way to convince a large number of people is to write an emotionally powerful novel or screenplay. Fictional characters are by far the most powerful role models in society, so tell that story.
    - anotherturn 10y ago
      People are quick to forget though? I can't think of a film or book that brought some ethical misstep to the fore and changed human behavior en-mass over the long term? Edit: I guess religious texts could be used as a counterpoint.
  - anticodon 10y ago
    I'm a vegetarian myself, although for another reason: I don't want living beings to be tortured and killed for my food. But I find is that vegetarian propaganda is many times so disgusting and based on lies that it's probably going to turn people away from vegeterian food. Some vegeterians and vegans are obnoxious bigots and their efforts are generating opposite result - people start hating vegeterians and vegeterian food. So I don't evangelize vegeterian. Besides, my reasons are too complex for most people to understand: "But chicken and cows were created for us to eat! They are not suffering!".
    - projectorlochsa 10y ago
      Although, male calves are killed in milk production. Dairy cows cannot produce thousands of liters of milk without living a short life. Chickens that produce eggs were bred into monsters that can't live long. I do not think any hate is rational and believe that any kind of vegan propaganda is beneficial to the cause. Fossil fuels are nothing compared to nitrite waste.
      - anticodon 10y ago
        I've noticed that when you blame people for something (eating meat, for example), they're not going to listen, it's causing opposite reaction - to defend and continue doing the same thing. So, maybe it's possible to persuade people to stop eating meat, but it requires much wisdom and patience... I don't really try. When my friends ask me, I answer politely, but it's very hard, because when I say: "I'm do not want to kill living beings for food because they're suffering" it's already sounds like I'm blaming them. :(
    - btschaegg 10y ago
      Dito for me (although I personally take the climate influences more as a reason than the ethics). The interesting thing is that, if someone finds out by chance that I'm a vegetarian, they always ask me for the reason. At times I almost suspect they expect some moral lecture just to be able to oppose it. Something in human nature just seems to force us to dig trenches that way. Also, there are the moments when you as the vegetarian get lectured on how "it's natural" to eat meat when in my area, some 50-60 years ago, you would have been inredibly rich or lucky if you got one piece of meat each day. Go figure.
  - sjy 10y ago
    It is unrealistic to expect that any one person could convince a sizeable portion of the world to become vegetarian, but simply by being one you can influence others without being evangelical. I would not have become a vegetarian without the passive influence of friends who demonstrated that it was possible (and easy!), without actively encouraging me to switch. Being a vegetarian also reduces the amount of meat consumed by people who I cook for, or who prepare food for a group that includes me.
    - anotherturn 10y ago
      I was vegetarian for about 6 years but didn't have quite the same experience as you (in the early 2000's). By and large I was met with incredulity or confusion. Top Gear using the word "Vegetarian" as an insult didn't help matters either :p
- weq 10y ago
  Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world. Being vego doesnt mean good for the planet, although yes, probably the main cause of desforestation is beef production... The permafrost is melting. coral reefs around the world are dieing. Its only a matter of years until fish populations to collapse (coral reefs house 75% of the world fish). Unfortunately the writing is on the wall, we have already tipped the scales and its going to take another 100k years for the balance to be restored. Realistically, we are doomed. How do we reverse climate change when our goal in life is to go out, have a career, make money. We make every effort to reduce poverty and 3rd world conditions becauase its better... But its not. I saw on a doco last night a guy from PNG, his community just sold their land to Exxon Mobile to drill for gas, 50billion they say they would extract. He was filmed with a with a primary rainforest in the background, saying he expected the place be like new york city (but all the money has been embezled by corrupt politicans). I looked at him, with his ripped muscles and young features, pelo diet and thought "people who have it all, want to look like you. Live and eat like you. YOU HAVE IT ALL. Sure, you dont have collatoral for a house, but u have the life that educated and developed people strive for..."
  - pg314 10y ago
    > Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world. 75% of soy beans are used as animal feed [1]. [1] http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/soyreport/soy_and_its_uses/ http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/so...
  - shradha408 10y ago
    Interesting! May I know the name of this documentary?
im3w1l 10y ago
We are living the Malthusian dystopia and the solution is as trivial to state as it is impossible to implement. A global one child policy.
- mathattack 10y ago
  As societies get richer, they have less kids. And each child has more capital. This isn't a bad outcome.
  - im3w1l 10y ago
    That has been the trend so far. But I would be cautious about extrapolating too aggressively from that. A situation with rich people that aren't breeding is not evolutionarily stable.
    - jacobush 10y ago
      What does that even mean?
      - sjy 10y ago
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy
        jacobush 10y ago
        TIL
        im3w1l 10y ago
        Super interesting! Though it wasn't exactly what I meant. I just meant some people will be more and some will be less inclined to children. And that in society where people choose not to have children there will be a strong evolutionary force favoring those with a stronger drive for children.
- 10y ago
wolfram74 10y ago
You can start an iron fertilization project for around 20k in boat rental fees + legal fees for illegal ocean dumping. Major companies do it for less altruistic reasons all the time.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  This is an interesting suggestion - though I'm not sure of the net effect of iron fertilization? How much iron achieves what? I guess the legal fees cover dumping of anything ranging from nuclear waste to rubbish destined for recycling? I'd assume one could get those waived if there was a proven positive effect of the fertilization.
  - greglindahl 10y ago
    Recent studies say that iron fertilization sequesters a lot less carbon than you might think, so maybe we should defer worrying about the economics until we know how much carbon it sequesters?
- weq 10y ago
  i think if we ever battle climate change, its going to be this geo-engineering that saves us. Purely with population growth, we are doomed. Even if everyone had solar powered everything, feeding this population on anymore more then plakton will fully utilise all arrible surfaces on the planet by 2050
NumberCruncher 10y ago
>>how would you fix the oceans Use your bike whenever it is possible instead of your car. By the way it is also good for your health not only for the environment. Buy products that are produced in your neighbourhood and are not shipped twice around the world.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  I don't have a car so tend to take public transport or walk. But that aside, I recall reading that heavy industry releases a great deal more CO2 than all cars on the roads and that cars are a bit of a red-herring. No source though so I could be wrong. Shipping, yes. That is a great polluter - good shout - though it primarily applies to food right? It's tricky to buy everything locally-produced e.g the mac I'm typing on. Shipping exists in part because raw materials are spread throughout the globe.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - NumberCruncher 10y ago
    Yes, shipping your 1,3 kg mac (or whatever it weights) around the world once in his lifetime is much more harmless than shipping all your fruits from Brasil to Europe where you could buy local products. Maybe we could survive without eating mango or banana all the time. There is a lot of finger-pointing going on. Every proposal for a solution which involves me changing the way I live is a red herring. The industry I am working in is not responsible for killing our environment. The car I drive is much harmless then the meat you eat. Turning off my TV set and reading books or going on a walk instead would not save the world until everybody follows my example so why not spend 5 hours of my free time every day in front of the screen? Everything - except talking online about what others should change in their lifes to protect our enviroment - is too uncomfortable for me so let's use Rust or Go instead of the inefficient Python because this will save the world from humanity. Yes it will, if you work on Skynet. Otherwise won't.
weq 10y ago
Make all plastic based on petroleum illegal. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.
- D_Alex 10y ago
  That is a terrible idea, for many reasons, and it would not reduce CO2 emissions... probably the opposite. A much better idea would be to reserve petroleum and natural gas for production of high value products such as plastics, instead of using it as an energy source now that renewable energy is competitive on cost.
  - arvidj 10y ago
    Is that so? I recently bought some fake-plastic bags made out of plant matter (not fossilized mind you) in the hope that they would be more environmentally sustainable. As I remember it, googling did not turn up any conclusive evidence to the contrary. Why do you think banning plastics would be a bad idea?
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      Because: - there are very many plastics with different properties, and - AFAIK - not all of them can be replaced with plant matter - replacing all plastics with plants will likely compete with agriculture for land use - if you just went and banned plastics, we'd have to use things like glass, metals and woods instead; not sure how the manufacturing footprint compares between metals and plastics, but just consider that if every plastic item you have around you was made from steel instead, how much heavier everything would be, and how it would impact energy requirements to move those things around Plastics are pretty awesome materials.
andrei_says_ 10y ago
Elect people who are willing to take science-supported reality in consideration when creating policy.
- _andromeda_ 10y ago
  I've come to firmly reject this idea lately. I have been asking myself this question of the validity of climate change science. I came to this conclusion: all the policy in the world wouldn't matter unless one thing happened - find more cost effective energy alternatives. Period. End of story. Now, whether you're a climate change denier or not, all this boils down to is, is it(energy source) cheaper? Not just cheaper in terms of a one to one comparison but also included is the cost of deployment. You've got to embrace a praxeological vantage point and ask, what will the majority of actors purposefully engage in in order to meet their energy demands? Will most humans choose clean energy because it is good for the environment even though it hurts them fiscally? The hurtful but pragmatic answer to this is a firm NO. Think about how hard government policy has tried to deal with something that's already illegal - drugs - and yet it has failed spectacularly. Will these same government actors all of a sudden become competent enough to deal with big oil (whom I believe are just being pragmatic about meeting the world energy demands)? Once you put it that way, it becomes very clear, policy is borderline nonsense and is just another excuse for government to infringe on private property rights. So, the solution? Intense research in finding energy alternatives that are truly cheaper in terms of BOTH large scale deployment as well as one to one comparison. Right now I'm not convinced we have anything that fits the bill.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  Votes only count if the people you vote for can be counted on. Those people are often very thin on the ground, hard to identify (it could be a political masquerade) or are unelectable because the voting majority don't like them.
  - cornholio 10y ago
    Then, at least don't vote for candidate who makes a campaign point out of mocking science and promoting quacks in key public positions. That's something that most people could do.
MrQuincle 10y ago
Technically. + Instead of hunting on the seas we should perform aquaculture. Establish diets that can use sea vegetables. Create methods to harvest on sea. This can reduce CO2 in the oceans and reduces the burden on land. + Accelerating research into reducing the CO2 footprint of our food. Lab grown meat and fish needs to be on wafer scales. + Create market places that reduces friction between CO2 producers and CO2 reducers. Make it easier to share solar panels or to share roofs. Make it easier to provide clean energy to Indian or Chinese households. Make it easier to find locations for wind mills. All these things can be accelerated through digital communication.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  All great suggestions. Something that seems like it could be a side project would be to "Make it easier to find locations for wind mills." I suspect at present the primary limiting factors are locating areas of land that are (1) windy (2) accessible (3) cheap to develop?
  - detaro 10y ago
    The job of finding technically suitable locations is (as far as I know) pretty well covered: it's fairly straightforward meteorology and the industry obviously has a huge interest in getting it right, so they have invested into good tools for it, both for theoretical modeling and for in-the-field evaluation of candidates. Harder parts are: * navigating the conflict of interest with/impact on people living nearby, land owners/users, nature, ... to actually get permission to build and operate * getting locations properly integrated into the grid, since they often are far away from areas using a lot of electricity. * and of course predicting the legal and market framework for the future, to figure out profitability
staticelf 10y ago
Do not eat meat, become a vegetarian. Drive less or get an electric car. For your household, get clean energy. Do not use plastic when not needed. Repair your products instead of purchasing new ones. Recycle. Etc.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
I see people mentioning things like "become a vegetarian" or "bike to work", but those are easy and neglible-impact things. Sure, they'd have a huge effect if half of the population suddenly adopted them, but that's not going to happen - so just going vegetarian yourself and calling it a day is not really helping anything. What I'd love to see is a list of high-impact work one could use their skills to help with. Maybe some research groups would use a better software package? Maybe there's a process that could help and is not yet economically viable, but could be made such? Let's try and list things like that.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  This is exactly what I was thinking, though clearly failed to communicate. I already do a number of the things mentioned but I feel like it makes very little, if any difference. From the comments below I've stared thinking of some things I can do by putting my dev skillset to use: * contact Ethan Brown of Beyond Meat to see if there's anything he could do with my volunteer hours * Investigate whether there is an issue with finding locations for windfarms and if that is a real limiting factor in having more. Seems like a simple enough problem to solve
- qbaqbaqba 10y ago
  I have some doubts about becoming vegetarian: soya cultivation has a huge negative impact on rain forests and on farmers. I prefer to obtain meat from local farmers that use traditional methods - don't abuse antibiotics and use locally grown pasture.
  - adrianN 10y ago
    A large part of the soy is being fed to livestock.
  - martalist 10y ago
    Soya beans aren't the only bean a vegetarian can eat. There are plenty of protein rich plants that will grow in almost every climate. While I applaud your meat buying preferences, it would be an environmental disaster for every meat eater on earth to attempt to do the same.
qplex 10y ago
Consume less. Don't buy useless things. Don't drive a car. Don't fly. Buy your electricity from a sustainable source. Eat less meat. Try to get other people to do the same. I find it's hard to do most of these things, and I don't really have much hope that people will change their habits. Most people don't even realise that they live in an illusion of reality where "everything is possible, you just have try hard enough".
- gambiting 10y ago
  Sure, I try to do that, and then I realise that just one US state is burning off millions of dollars worth of natural gas per day[0] , purely because it's too cheap to make it worth capturing. Or I go back to my home country and see people burning rubbish and mud coal and realise I can't breathe in winter and the snow is black/grayish. So you know, at some point you think to yourself - why would I stop driving my Euro 6-compliant, modern, very efficient car, that is extremely heavily taxed to offset pollution, to make....what difference? I know if a million other people made the same choice it would make a difference, but it's the same as telling someone who is already leading a very considerate, very heavily taxed lifestyle that they should do their part too, while their neighbour is clearly burning plastic in their front yard, and no one cares. It's a weird one, because I don't want to say "it's ok for me to pollute a little bit, because there are people who pollute lots", but damn, it is super hard to justify making life even more expensive for myself. [0] http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dakota-gas-flaring-20140717-story.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dakota-gas-flaring-20140...
  - qplex 10y ago
    I agree, it's not easy to justify. "Would you like to breathe some unfiltered exhaust on the side of the road, completely unprotected from the heavy vehicles that pass by at high speeds? Bicycling! Health benefits!" But seriously, if there is no infrastructure, its quite hard to sell something that depends on it.
- deepvibrations 10y ago
  CONSUME LESS! I feel like that really is the key- A holistic approach is best- trying to be aware of the impact you have across the board. Eg. It's not much good being vegetarian if you're also drinking a few bottles of water from plastic bottles everyday. Preaching to others is not that effective, so leading by example is the only way in my opinion!
qbaqbaqba 10y ago
Perhaps you can write more efficient code? Use HTML instead of JS when you can? Don't force people to buy a new phone/computer every x years?
- anotherturn 10y ago
  First I laughed, then I thought. Perhaps one could build something akin to Google Page Speed, but instead it provides a measure of green-friendliness? It detects expensive animations, overloading of javascript, etc. I reckon the React community wouldn't like it much though... The question is - if the whole internet uses 10% less power, does it make enough of a difference given its growth rate?
programmernews3 10y ago
Population control is the only long term option. It has naturally happened in Japan and most of the West. China is now under control as well. We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached.
- _andromeda_ 10y ago
  >We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached I agree with you but for different reasons. Your suggestion borders on some mild form of eugenics that I don't necessarily agree with. What I would say is that the figurative 'training wheels' should be taken off the bicycle i.e. Africans have to figure their own stuff out without depending on the west for foreign aid if any long term solution is to be found for Africa's problems.
- messo 10y ago
  > We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached. That's not how it works. Check out Hans Rosling: https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-lead-to-overpopulation/ https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-l...
bamie9l 10y ago
The ocean cleanup project is working to remove plastic: https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ I'm not affiliated so can't speak for due diligence etc. but they have posted regular progress updates whilst they test and develop their solution
agumonkey 10y ago
Same for a lot of other issues: - society - forest - health - education - thermal insulation - homeless The web make you feel connected .. but to all the wrong projects. I'm going to redirect the efforts toward "physical" change from now on.
- anotherturn 10y ago
  There is plenty in the world that needs fixing. But as is the case with startups - if you try work on everything nothing works. Focused* effort brings about the greatest likelihood of success. *I realize I'm being a bit hypocritical as I'm proposing working on fixing oceans (which will have plenty of added benefits wrt climate change etc.) as a side project to bring about change; in addition to my full time freelance dev work.
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    Fair point nonetheless, being organized is one of the most important factor.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    I agree. But we could use a good summary of what are the most important problems, subdivided into areas that need work / improvement and some estimate of their impact potential, so that people who want to focus on a single thing can choose high-impact things.
    - anotherturn 10y ago
      I think the Global Priorities Project [1] has that covered - at least to first order. "Definition: Global Catastrophic Risk – risk of events or processes that would lead to the deaths of approximately a tenth of the world’s population, or have a comparable impact." [1]: http://globalprioritiesproject.org/ http://globalprioritiesproject.org/
    - agumonkey 10y ago
      I'm slightly smiling. Aren't we reinventing politics ?
Asooka 10y ago
We're just pawns in the game of life played by the few thousand members of the global ruling class. Nothing you or I do can have any impact whatsoever on anything of importance. Consume as much as you can, because nobody who can do something will do anything until the sky is literally falling.

greglindahl 10y ago

Become a vegetarian. Not only will you not contribute to the fish market, but you'll also reduce the amount of fertilizer flowing into the ocean.

anotherturn 10y ago
To make a dent I suspect becoming a vegetarian isn't enough - you'd have to become an effective-evangelical vegetarian. So, given that fear and shock tactics are failing - how do I convince the world (or a sizeable portion of it) to become vegetarian? I heard a podcast recently about a guy working to produce real meat from plant matter. This would probably be an effective solution. By spending time otherwise used for side projects perhaps I could help bring the cost of production down to below that of animal-meat? Know of anything I can work on to help?
- greglindahl 10y ago
  [ I have no idea why people are downvoting me, so I'll just remove this comment. ]
  - anotherturn 10y ago
    I think you missed the point of the comment... "fear and shock tactics" have been applied to me wrt climate change, vegetarianism, etc. But all they seem to have done is desensitize me. Hence my saying that they do not work. I'm exploring whether there are things that I (and the rest of the HN audience) can do to make a dent. Right now my measure of effectiveness and productivity is almost exclusively related to dev work. It'd be worthwhile to find a way to expand this to include more nebulous objectives - and having some practical things to work on seems a step in the right direction?
    - greglindahl 10y ago
      I wasn't suggesting fear and shock tactics, and I agree that they don't work. My suggestion was quite different.
      - anotherturn 10y ago
        You seem to have redacted your comment - but if I recall correctly your suggestion was to go ahead and evangelize but asserted that I would fail because I mentioned "shock and fear tactics"?
    - 7952 10y ago
      Fear and shock dont work. Shame is the solution. Work to make bad actions socially unacceptable.
      - anotherturn 10y ago
        Kind of like the star rating system from Black Mirror?
- prawn 10y ago
  I think someone would see more success convincing people to eat less meat rather than eat no meat. e.g., make red meat a special occasion thing rather than an almost nightly occurrence. This could work a little at a personal level, but any larger campaign is going to come up against industry groups with more funding and no financial reason to care about much of the environment. I don't know about the US, but in Australia, there are very strong campaigns promoting lamb consumption, for example. It's tied very effectively, through marketing, to our national identity as part of Australia Day.
  - greglindahl 10y ago
    "eat less meat" has been tried and doesn't appear to work that well. In the US, there are lots of industries in which producers of beef, eggs, pork have to pay $$ to a marketing board that buys advertising. Needless to say, they won't buy advertising that says "buy higher quality X" or "eat less X!" The government is for it and the courts have upheld being forced to pay into it, so, there you have it.
- anigbrowl 10y ago
  The best way to convince a large number of people is to write an emotionally powerful novel or screenplay. Fictional characters are by far the most powerful role models in society, so tell that story.
  - anotherturn 10y ago
    People are quick to forget though? I can't think of a film or book that brought some ethical misstep to the fore and changed human behavior en-mass over the long term? Edit: I guess religious texts could be used as a counterpoint.
- anticodon 10y ago
  I'm a vegetarian myself, although for another reason: I don't want living beings to be tortured and killed for my food. But I find is that vegetarian propaganda is many times so disgusting and based on lies that it's probably going to turn people away from vegeterian food. Some vegeterians and vegans are obnoxious bigots and their efforts are generating opposite result - people start hating vegeterians and vegeterian food. So I don't evangelize vegeterian. Besides, my reasons are too complex for most people to understand: "But chicken and cows were created for us to eat! They are not suffering!".
  - projectorlochsa 10y ago
    Although, male calves are killed in milk production. Dairy cows cannot produce thousands of liters of milk without living a short life. Chickens that produce eggs were bred into monsters that can't live long. I do not think any hate is rational and believe that any kind of vegan propaganda is beneficial to the cause. Fossil fuels are nothing compared to nitrite waste.
    - anticodon 10y ago
      I've noticed that when you blame people for something (eating meat, for example), they're not going to listen, it's causing opposite reaction - to defend and continue doing the same thing. So, maybe it's possible to persuade people to stop eating meat, but it requires much wisdom and patience... I don't really try. When my friends ask me, I answer politely, but it's very hard, because when I say: "I'm do not want to kill living beings for food because they're suffering" it's already sounds like I'm blaming them. :(
  - btschaegg 10y ago
    Dito for me (although I personally take the climate influences more as a reason than the ethics). The interesting thing is that, if someone finds out by chance that I'm a vegetarian, they always ask me for the reason. At times I almost suspect they expect some moral lecture just to be able to oppose it. Something in human nature just seems to force us to dig trenches that way. Also, there are the moments when you as the vegetarian get lectured on how "it's natural" to eat meat when in my area, some 50-60 years ago, you would have been inredibly rich or lucky if you got one piece of meat each day. Go figure.
- sjy 10y ago
  It is unrealistic to expect that any one person could convince a sizeable portion of the world to become vegetarian, but simply by being one you can influence others without being evangelical. I would not have become a vegetarian without the passive influence of friends who demonstrated that it was possible (and easy!), without actively encouraging me to switch. Being a vegetarian also reduces the amount of meat consumed by people who I cook for, or who prepare food for a group that includes me.
  - anotherturn 10y ago
    I was vegetarian for about 6 years but didn't have quite the same experience as you (in the early 2000's). By and large I was met with incredulity or confusion. Top Gear using the word "Vegetarian" as an insult didn't help matters either :p
weq 10y ago
Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world. Being vego doesnt mean good for the planet, although yes, probably the main cause of desforestation is beef production... The permafrost is melting. coral reefs around the world are dieing. Its only a matter of years until fish populations to collapse (coral reefs house 75% of the world fish). Unfortunately the writing is on the wall, we have already tipped the scales and its going to take another 100k years for the balance to be restored. Realistically, we are doomed. How do we reverse climate change when our goal in life is to go out, have a career, make money. We make every effort to reduce poverty and 3rd world conditions becauase its better... But its not. I saw on a doco last night a guy from PNG, his community just sold their land to Exxon Mobile to drill for gas, 50billion they say they would extract. He was filmed with a with a primary rainforest in the background, saying he expected the place be like new york city (but all the money has been embezled by corrupt politicans). I looked at him, with his ripped muscles and young features, pelo diet and thought "people who have it all, want to look like you. Live and eat like you. YOU HAVE IT ALL. Sure, you dont have collatoral for a house, but u have the life that educated and developed people strive for..."
- pg314 10y ago
  > Soy beans / palm oil are one of the top causes of deforestration in rainforests around the world. 75% of soy beans are used as animal feed [1]. [1] http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/soyreport/soy_and_its_uses/ http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/footprint/agriculture/soy/so...
- shradha408 10y ago
  Interesting! May I know the name of this documentary?

im3w1l 10y ago

We are living the Malthusian dystopia and the solution is as trivial to state as it is impossible to implement. A global one child policy.

mathattack 10y ago
As societies get richer, they have less kids. And each child has more capital. This isn't a bad outcome.
- im3w1l 10y ago
  That has been the trend so far. But I would be cautious about extrapolating too aggressively from that. A situation with rich people that aren't breeding is not evolutionarily stable.
  - jacobush 10y ago
    What does that even mean?
    - sjy 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionarily_stable_strategy
      - jacobush 10y ago
        TIL
      - im3w1l 10y ago
        Super interesting! Though it wasn't exactly what I meant. I just meant some people will be more and some will be less inclined to children. And that in society where people choose not to have children there will be a strong evolutionary force favoring those with a stronger drive for children.
10y ago

wolfram74 10y ago

You can start an iron fertilization project for around 20k in boat rental fees + legal fees for illegal ocean dumping. Major companies do it for less altruistic reasons all the time.

anotherturn 10y ago
This is an interesting suggestion - though I'm not sure of the net effect of iron fertilization? How much iron achieves what? I guess the legal fees cover dumping of anything ranging from nuclear waste to rubbish destined for recycling? I'd assume one could get those waived if there was a proven positive effect of the fertilization.
- greglindahl 10y ago
  Recent studies say that iron fertilization sequesters a lot less carbon than you might think, so maybe we should defer worrying about the economics until we know how much carbon it sequesters?
weq 10y ago
i think if we ever battle climate change, its going to be this geo-engineering that saves us. Purely with population growth, we are doomed. Even if everyone had solar powered everything, feeding this population on anymore more then plakton will fully utilise all arrible surfaces on the planet by 2050

NumberCruncher 10y ago

>>how would you fix the oceans Use your bike whenever it is possible instead of your car. By the way it is also good for your health not only for the environment. Buy products that are produced in your neighbourhood and are not shipped twice around the world.

anotherturn 10y ago
I don't have a car so tend to take public transport or walk. But that aside, I recall reading that heavy industry releases a great deal more CO2 than all cars on the roads and that cars are a bit of a red-herring. No source though so I could be wrong. Shipping, yes. That is a great polluter - good shout - though it primarily applies to food right? It's tricky to buy everything locally-produced e.g the mac I'm typing on. Shipping exists in part because raw materials are spread throughout the globe.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- NumberCruncher 10y ago
  Yes, shipping your 1,3 kg mac (or whatever it weights) around the world once in his lifetime is much more harmless than shipping all your fruits from Brasil to Europe where you could buy local products. Maybe we could survive without eating mango or banana all the time. There is a lot of finger-pointing going on. Every proposal for a solution which involves me changing the way I live is a red herring. The industry I am working in is not responsible for killing our environment. The car I drive is much harmless then the meat you eat. Turning off my TV set and reading books or going on a walk instead would not save the world until everybody follows my example so why not spend 5 hours of my free time every day in front of the screen? Everything - except talking online about what others should change in their lifes to protect our enviroment - is too uncomfortable for me so let's use Rust or Go instead of the inefficient Python because this will save the world from humanity. Yes it will, if you work on Skynet. Otherwise won't.

weq 10y ago

Make all plastic based on petroleum illegal. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

D_Alex 10y ago
That is a terrible idea, for many reasons, and it would not reduce CO2 emissions... probably the opposite. A much better idea would be to reserve petroleum and natural gas for production of high value products such as plastics, instead of using it as an energy source now that renewable energy is competitive on cost.
- arvidj 10y ago
  Is that so? I recently bought some fake-plastic bags made out of plant matter (not fossilized mind you) in the hope that they would be more environmentally sustainable. As I remember it, googling did not turn up any conclusive evidence to the contrary. Why do you think banning plastics would be a bad idea?
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Because: - there are very many plastics with different properties, and - AFAIK - not all of them can be replaced with plant matter - replacing all plastics with plants will likely compete with agriculture for land use - if you just went and banned plastics, we'd have to use things like glass, metals and woods instead; not sure how the manufacturing footprint compares between metals and plastics, but just consider that if every plastic item you have around you was made from steel instead, how much heavier everything would be, and how it would impact energy requirements to move those things around Plastics are pretty awesome materials.

andrei_says_ 10y ago

Elect people who are willing to take science-supported reality in consideration when creating policy.

_andromeda_ 10y ago
I've come to firmly reject this idea lately. I have been asking myself this question of the validity of climate change science. I came to this conclusion: all the policy in the world wouldn't matter unless one thing happened - find more cost effective energy alternatives. Period. End of story. Now, whether you're a climate change denier or not, all this boils down to is, is it(energy source) cheaper? Not just cheaper in terms of a one to one comparison but also included is the cost of deployment. You've got to embrace a praxeological vantage point and ask, what will the majority of actors purposefully engage in in order to meet their energy demands? Will most humans choose clean energy because it is good for the environment even though it hurts them fiscally? The hurtful but pragmatic answer to this is a firm NO. Think about how hard government policy has tried to deal with something that's already illegal - drugs - and yet it has failed spectacularly. Will these same government actors all of a sudden become competent enough to deal with big oil (whom I believe are just being pragmatic about meeting the world energy demands)? Once you put it that way, it becomes very clear, policy is borderline nonsense and is just another excuse for government to infringe on private property rights. So, the solution? Intense research in finding energy alternatives that are truly cheaper in terms of BOTH large scale deployment as well as one to one comparison. Right now I'm not convinced we have anything that fits the bill.
anotherturn 10y ago
Votes only count if the people you vote for can be counted on. Those people are often very thin on the ground, hard to identify (it could be a political masquerade) or are unelectable because the voting majority don't like them.
- cornholio 10y ago
  Then, at least don't vote for candidate who makes a campaign point out of mocking science and promoting quacks in key public positions. That's something that most people could do.

MrQuincle 10y ago

Technically. + Instead of hunting on the seas we should perform aquaculture. Establish diets that can use sea vegetables. Create methods to harvest on sea. This can reduce CO2 in the oceans and reduces the burden on land. + Accelerating research into reducing the CO2 footprint of our food. Lab grown meat and fish needs to be on wafer scales. + Create market places that reduces friction between CO2 producers and CO2 reducers. Make it easier to share solar panels or to share roofs. Make it easier to provide clean energy to Indian or Chinese households. Make it easier to find locations for wind mills. All these things can be accelerated through digital communication.

anotherturn 10y ago
All great suggestions. Something that seems like it could be a side project would be to "Make it easier to find locations for wind mills." I suspect at present the primary limiting factors are locating areas of land that are (1) windy (2) accessible (3) cheap to develop?
- detaro 10y ago
  The job of finding technically suitable locations is (as far as I know) pretty well covered: it's fairly straightforward meteorology and the industry obviously has a huge interest in getting it right, so they have invested into good tools for it, both for theoretical modeling and for in-the-field evaluation of candidates. Harder parts are: * navigating the conflict of interest with/impact on people living nearby, land owners/users, nature, ... to actually get permission to build and operate * getting locations properly integrated into the grid, since they often are far away from areas using a lot of electricity. * and of course predicting the legal and market framework for the future, to figure out profitability

staticelf 10y ago

Do not eat meat, become a vegetarian. Drive less or get an electric car. For your household, get clean energy. Do not use plastic when not needed. Repair your products instead of purchasing new ones. Recycle. Etc.

TeMPOraL 10y ago

I see people mentioning things like "become a vegetarian" or "bike to work", but those are easy and neglible-impact things. Sure, they'd have a huge effect if half of the population suddenly adopted them, but that's not going to happen - so just going vegetarian yourself and calling it a day is not really helping anything. What I'd love to see is a list of high-impact work one could use their skills to help with. Maybe some research groups would use a better software package? Maybe there's a process that could help and is not yet economically viable, but could be made such? Let's try and list things like that.

anotherturn 10y ago
This is exactly what I was thinking, though clearly failed to communicate. I already do a number of the things mentioned but I feel like it makes very little, if any difference. From the comments below I've stared thinking of some things I can do by putting my dev skillset to use: * contact Ethan Brown of Beyond Meat to see if there's anything he could do with my volunteer hours * Investigate whether there is an issue with finding locations for windfarms and if that is a real limiting factor in having more. Seems like a simple enough problem to solve
qbaqbaqba 10y ago
I have some doubts about becoming vegetarian: soya cultivation has a huge negative impact on rain forests and on farmers. I prefer to obtain meat from local farmers that use traditional methods - don't abuse antibiotics and use locally grown pasture.
- adrianN 10y ago
  A large part of the soy is being fed to livestock.
- martalist 10y ago
  Soya beans aren't the only bean a vegetarian can eat. There are plenty of protein rich plants that will grow in almost every climate. While I applaud your meat buying preferences, it would be an environmental disaster for every meat eater on earth to attempt to do the same.

qplex 10y ago

Consume less. Don't buy useless things. Don't drive a car. Don't fly. Buy your electricity from a sustainable source. Eat less meat. Try to get other people to do the same. I find it's hard to do most of these things, and I don't really have much hope that people will change their habits. Most people don't even realise that they live in an illusion of reality where "everything is possible, you just have try hard enough".

gambiting 10y ago
Sure, I try to do that, and then I realise that just one US state is burning off millions of dollars worth of natural gas per day[0] , purely because it's too cheap to make it worth capturing. Or I go back to my home country and see people burning rubbish and mud coal and realise I can't breathe in winter and the snow is black/grayish. So you know, at some point you think to yourself - why would I stop driving my Euro 6-compliant, modern, very efficient car, that is extremely heavily taxed to offset pollution, to make....what difference? I know if a million other people made the same choice it would make a difference, but it's the same as telling someone who is already leading a very considerate, very heavily taxed lifestyle that they should do their part too, while their neighbour is clearly burning plastic in their front yard, and no one cares. It's a weird one, because I don't want to say "it's ok for me to pollute a little bit, because there are people who pollute lots", but damn, it is super hard to justify making life even more expensive for myself. [0] http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dakota-gas-flaring-20140717-story.html http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-dakota-gas-flaring-20140...
- qplex 10y ago
  I agree, it's not easy to justify. "Would you like to breathe some unfiltered exhaust on the side of the road, completely unprotected from the heavy vehicles that pass by at high speeds? Bicycling! Health benefits!" But seriously, if there is no infrastructure, its quite hard to sell something that depends on it.
deepvibrations 10y ago
CONSUME LESS! I feel like that really is the key- A holistic approach is best- trying to be aware of the impact you have across the board. Eg. It's not much good being vegetarian if you're also drinking a few bottles of water from plastic bottles everyday. Preaching to others is not that effective, so leading by example is the only way in my opinion!

qbaqbaqba 10y ago

Perhaps you can write more efficient code? Use HTML instead of JS when you can? Don't force people to buy a new phone/computer every x years?

anotherturn 10y ago
First I laughed, then I thought. Perhaps one could build something akin to Google Page Speed, but instead it provides a measure of green-friendliness? It detects expensive animations, overloading of javascript, etc. I reckon the React community wouldn't like it much though... The question is - if the whole internet uses 10% less power, does it make enough of a difference given its growth rate?

programmernews3 10y ago

Population control is the only long term option. It has naturally happened in Japan and most of the West. China is now under control as well. We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached.

_andromeda_ 10y ago
>We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached I agree with you but for different reasons. Your suggestion borders on some mild form of eugenics that I don't necessarily agree with. What I would say is that the figurative 'training wheels' should be taken off the bicycle i.e. Africans have to figure their own stuff out without depending on the west for foreign aid if any long term solution is to be found for Africa's problems.
messo 10y ago
> We now need to limit the artificial growth of Africa by stopping food programs and allowing balance to be reached. That's not how it works. Check out Hans Rosling: https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-lead-to-overpopulation/ https://www.gapminder.org/videos/will-saving-poor-children-l...

bamie9l 10y ago

The ocean cleanup project is working to remove plastic: https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ https://www.theoceancleanup.com/ I'm not affiliated so can't speak for due diligence etc. but they have posted regular progress updates whilst they test and develop their solution

agumonkey 10y ago

Same for a lot of other issues: - society - forest - health - education - thermal insulation - homeless The web make you feel connected .. but to all the wrong projects. I'm going to redirect the efforts toward "physical" change from now on.

anotherturn 10y ago
There is plenty in the world that needs fixing. But as is the case with startups - if you try work on everything nothing works. Focused* effort brings about the greatest likelihood of success. *I realize I'm being a bit hypocritical as I'm proposing working on fixing oceans (which will have plenty of added benefits wrt climate change etc.) as a side project to bring about change; in addition to my full time freelance dev work.
- agumonkey 10y ago
  Fair point nonetheless, being organized is one of the most important factor.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  I agree. But we could use a good summary of what are the most important problems, subdivided into areas that need work / improvement and some estimate of their impact potential, so that people who want to focus on a single thing can choose high-impact things.
  - anotherturn 10y ago
    I think the Global Priorities Project [1] has that covered - at least to first order. "Definition: Global Catastrophic Risk – risk of events or processes that would lead to the deaths of approximately a tenth of the world’s population, or have a comparable impact." [1]: http://globalprioritiesproject.org/ http://globalprioritiesproject.org/
  - agumonkey 10y ago
    I'm slightly smiling. Aren't we reinventing politics ?

Asooka 10y ago

We're just pawns in the game of life played by the few thousand members of the global ruling class. Nothing you or I do can have any impact whatsoever on anything of importance. Consume as much as you can, because nobody who can do something will do anything until the sky is literally falling.