5 ms·
These type of solutions seem like the only reasonable ones to address climate change. Goals of cutting carbon emissions often tend to be misaligned with other a
by jameslk 10y ago
These type of solutions seem like the only reasonable ones to address climate change. Goals of cutting carbon emissions often tend to be misaligned with other activities that would be hard to stop en masse, such as everyone still driving a fossil fuel emitting vehicle, farms using fertilizer to grow their crops or individuals who want to use their AC because they're hot.
Sure it'd be great if we find alternatives to a majority of things that contribute to carbon emissions, but then there's the difficulty of getting everyone to use these alternatives across the board (along with the messy politics of it) and if you succeed at that, you'll still have to deal with other countries who aren't going to change their habits. It's essentially a global game of whack-a-mole. And it needs to happen soon. Some scientists claim we're already beyond the ability to reverse climate change by eliminating these activities.
Given what we're up against, it seems far more reasonable to explore ways of negating our emissions, terraforming the planet or trying to find a way to live on a far less hospital earth. I'm all for continuing our march towards a globally smaller carbon footprint, but it should be done concurrently while we try to address the sobering possibility that it might not be enough.
- JamilD 10y agoThe challenges of "messy politics" and rigid habits of existing carbon emitters pale in comparison to reactive solutions. For example, it'd be far, far cheaper to forcibly take over the world and shut down every carbon emitting machine than to find another planet and terraform it. Surely we're collectively smart enough to find a global solution to this in the near future, given that our resources are appropriately allocated.
- yongjik 10y agoAny far-away technology looks promising, as long as you don't think too much about who's going to pay for it. If you think it's hard to persuade people to drive electric vehicles, imagine telling them to pay up enough $$$ to buy several Teslas per person, so that the government can run a carbon-capture plant somewhere you've never been to. Because it's safe to assume that atmospheric carbon capture will remain more expensive than not emitting it in the first place. Maybe somebody will invent a unicorn technology next year, but I wouldn't bet my planet's future on that.
- joshkpeterson 10y agoEven though it'll be that expensive, wait 50 years when we want to try and reverse all the shit coming our way. Maybe worth it at that point.
- spodek 10y ago> These type of solutions seem like the only reasonable ones to address climate change Equally important: - Reducing consumption (which, in my experience, increases happiness) - Having fewer babies
- virmundi 10y agoBut who and how will you limit the babies? For example, babies from the Middle East will outpace European babies by a large number. Should Europe limit immigrants' ability to conceive? If so, how? Would you force sterilization? Would you trade money for sterilization? This general idea is fraught with moral problems.
- virmundi 10y agoWhy the down votes? Would some people say why they are against talking about how the human population could enforce the idea of limiting itself? Given that it goes against the core biological imperative, I don't think I'm wrong in asking this.
- beobab 10y agoYou are not wrong in asking this, but the way you asked led people to believe that you are against such a thing, and people who object to what they perceive as your belief will down-vote you. As Scott Adams has so rightly pointed out, we are victims of our bias, and it is very difficult to think coherently on an emotive subject like this.
- IanCal 10y agoThe total fertility rate tends to drop when you improve access to birth control, improve the education of women and general living conditions. Those things are (apart from one for some people) not significant moral problems. Improved education of women also tends to reduce child mortality. The combination of these things and societal shifts has changed the total fertility rate in many countries to below replacement. Perhaps that's a sensible first step?
- okreallywtf 10y agoThis makes me think of the old adage "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure". We're basically saying "eh we'll just take the cure at the last minute." except we don't even know if the cure exists, we're hoping we can create one in time. Accepting the circumstances that we are in as a result of decades of targeted misinformation is like saying it will be easier to learn to live with less air when being repeatedly dunked in a toilet by bully's.
- tertius 10y agoIf you can't fight the bully then it's probably better to find alternative solutions than dunk your own head in the sand.