9 ms·

This graphic give a pretty good summary of the relative impact: https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2017/themosteffec.jpg https://3c17

This graphic give a pretty good summary of the relative impact: https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hires/2017/themosteffec.jpg https://3c1703fe8d.site.internapcdn.net/newman/gfx/news/hire...

thunderbong 8y ago
This is really a very good infographic - The biggest way we can impact climate change as individuals is to have fewer children. Yet, in most discussions I've seen, we talk about hybrid cars and vegetarian diet!
- Vinnl 8y ago
  Your children's contribution to climate change is their contribution, not yours. The goal of combating climate change is to make the planet more liveable. You don't achieve that by not living.
  - ForHackernews 8y ago
    > Your children's contribution to climate change is their contribution, not yours. It's not some moral game of attribution of blame, it's just maths. Fewer people produce less CO2.
    - doombolt 8y ago
      Yes, your children don't get to live to benefit some other people's children. That, or we end as species. Guess what? Worst case of global warming, mankind extermination. "Best" case, also mankind extermination.
      - ForHackernews 8y ago
        What a bunch of tosh. You're worried about "extinction" from people having fewer kids? Meanwhile, we're on track to 10 billion people before 2050. Talk about premature optimisation!
        doombolt 8y ago
        Then, truly, you live to benefit some other people's children. Basically you are a monk. Monks also known for not making the difference in all that removing sin business.
        ForHackernews 8y ago
        Heaven forbid you do something with your life except reproduce, or accidentally help anyone beyond your own progeny...
        doombolt 8y ago
        This is what you say, not me.
- NLips 8y ago
  It's difficult to persuade people to have fewer children, since the people alive today generally inherit the trait of wanting children. Further to that, I'm not sure it's a good idea anyway in many cases if you're worried about sustainability of the human race and our current lives - if we all stopped having children, society would pretty much collapse. Who's going to look after us when we're old? Clearly we don't all need to have 12 children, but 0 won't work either.
- thom 8y ago
  That's the cumulative effect of all your children's descendants. Good news - if you convince your child to make one fewer transatlantic flight, and to pass this knowledge on to all their children, then you are allowed to have kids without people making you feel bad.
- Radim 8y ago
  Mandatory link to "Idiocracy" and holding back on having children (it seemed like a joke back then!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N9nVLXMhPc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N9nVLXMhPc
  - rekado 8y ago
    I always roll my eyes when Idiocracy is brought up in this context. It has this old smell of eugenics, as people who take the premise seriously misunderstand the role of education and vastly overestimate genetics. If you are unhappy with the level of education of the public, then try to work on that instead of feeling encouraged to spread your superior genes. I recommend Carl Zimmer's latest book "She Has Her Mother's Laugh" for a look at the past and the present through the prism of heredity.
- curlypaul924 8y ago
  This sounds a lot like the stale argument that dying can reduce CO2 emissions.
  - adask 8y ago
    But the opposite is the argument that population increase/decrease is completely out of our control, which is just false.
tomp 8y ago
Why does “replace typical car with hybrid” help at all? Does regenerative braking save that much energy?
- NLips 8y ago
  Hybrids typically run the engine at or close to peak efficiency all the time, which more than makes up for transmission losses. In contrast, traditional ICE-only powered vehicles have to run the engine at a range of speeds, some of which are considerably less efficient.
- rypskar 8y ago
  >> Why does “replace typical car with hybrid” help at all? Does regenerative braking save that much energy? At least in my plug-in hybrid I get statistics on that. I have driven it 80% on electricity with average fuel consumption of 2.0 l/100km the 16 months I have owned it, that include 2 longer trips of 700km with average fuel consumption of 4.0 l/100km and some charging problems last winter. The car have 200hp, so would have been a lot more if not hybrid.
- ed_balls 8y ago
  I depends on you location and driving in the city e.g. Prius can have less total CO2 emission than Tesla S if the electricity comes from fossil fuels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM
  - tomp 8y ago
    I find that hard to believe. So you're saying that Prius, despite being more complicated (as it needs to route both internal combustion and electric power to the wheels), has an electric motor/transmission more efficient than Tesla and internal combustion engine more efficient than power plants? The only way I think that's possible is if weight is taken into account, Prius seems to be a bit smaller and thus possibly lighter than Model S...
    - curlypaul924 8y ago
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
The graphic hides the fact that energy consumption and pollution are extremely correlated with income. There is no meaningful "average" child, or average lifestyle, to base the last column on. No, I'm not implying that we shouldn't decrease population, just pointing out energy inequality. Also the chart severely underestimate the impact of diet.
adask 8y ago
This is a good illustration. People should look at it not only from their personal POV, but in terms of general policies regarding population size... There are parts of the world (for example, Africa) where population has been increasing ridiculously fast for decades and the estimates are that this will continue. A lot of this is thanks to the financial support from the West. When there's news that the population of Japan is decreasing people talk about it as if it's a catastrophe. But Japan is very densely populated right now and I think they'll be fine either way (maybe some short term economic struggles, but they won't go extinct). These topics can be politically taboo, but they shouldn't be. These issues are too important and long term effects can be catastrophic for the environment and the general quality of life on Earth.
- rekado 8y ago
  > There are parts of the world (for example, Africa) where population has been increasing ridiculously [...] Africa is big, so it's a very coarse way of narrowing down a location. Population pressure is a multiplier, so people in poor countries with few cars and a diet that does not depend on cross-country transport of food have a smaller impact on environment than fewer people accustomed to a more expensive life style. > When there's news that the population of Japan is decreasing people talk about it as if it's a catastrophe. An aging or decreasing population can be a catastrophe, but not because of environmental effects; the concerns are of a social nature, as a shrinking population usually means a reduction in essential services. The one child policy that was active for years in China has left a characteristic mark on the demographics, leading to a small population of young people supporting a large population of old people.
sridca 8y ago
I eat exclusively meat, but I am childfree and own no vehicles. That's make my contribution superior to the average vegan, yes?

thunderbong 8y ago

This is really a very good infographic - The biggest way we can impact climate change as individuals is to have fewer children. Yet, in most discussions I've seen, we talk about hybrid cars and vegetarian diet!

Vinnl 8y ago
Your children's contribution to climate change is their contribution, not yours. The goal of combating climate change is to make the planet more liveable. You don't achieve that by not living.
- ForHackernews 8y ago
  > Your children's contribution to climate change is their contribution, not yours. It's not some moral game of attribution of blame, it's just maths. Fewer people produce less CO2.
  - doombolt 8y ago
    Yes, your children don't get to live to benefit some other people's children. That, or we end as species. Guess what? Worst case of global warming, mankind extermination. "Best" case, also mankind extermination.
    - ForHackernews 8y ago
      What a bunch of tosh. You're worried about "extinction" from people having fewer kids? Meanwhile, we're on track to 10 billion people before 2050. Talk about premature optimisation!
      - doombolt 8y ago
        Then, truly, you live to benefit some other people's children. Basically you are a monk. Monks also known for not making the difference in all that removing sin business.
        ForHackernews 8y ago
        Heaven forbid you do something with your life except reproduce, or accidentally help anyone beyond your own progeny...
        doombolt 8y ago
        This is what you say, not me.
NLips 8y ago
It's difficult to persuade people to have fewer children, since the people alive today generally inherit the trait of wanting children. Further to that, I'm not sure it's a good idea anyway in many cases if you're worried about sustainability of the human race and our current lives - if we all stopped having children, society would pretty much collapse. Who's going to look after us when we're old? Clearly we don't all need to have 12 children, but 0 won't work either.
thom 8y ago
That's the cumulative effect of all your children's descendants. Good news - if you convince your child to make one fewer transatlantic flight, and to pass this knowledge on to all their children, then you are allowed to have kids without people making you feel bad.
Radim 8y ago
Mandatory link to "Idiocracy" and holding back on having children (it seemed like a joke back then!): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N9nVLXMhPc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N9nVLXMhPc
- rekado 8y ago
  I always roll my eyes when Idiocracy is brought up in this context. It has this old smell of eugenics, as people who take the premise seriously misunderstand the role of education and vastly overestimate genetics. If you are unhappy with the level of education of the public, then try to work on that instead of feeling encouraged to spread your superior genes. I recommend Carl Zimmer's latest book "She Has Her Mother's Laugh" for a look at the past and the present through the prism of heredity.
curlypaul924 8y ago
This sounds a lot like the stale argument that dying can reduce CO2 emissions.
- adask 8y ago
  But the opposite is the argument that population increase/decrease is completely out of our control, which is just false.

tomp 8y ago

Why does “replace typical car with hybrid” help at all? Does regenerative braking save that much energy?

NLips 8y ago
Hybrids typically run the engine at or close to peak efficiency all the time, which more than makes up for transmission losses. In contrast, traditional ICE-only powered vehicles have to run the engine at a range of speeds, some of which are considerably less efficient.
rypskar 8y ago
>> Why does “replace typical car with hybrid” help at all? Does regenerative braking save that much energy? At least in my plug-in hybrid I get statistics on that. I have driven it 80% on electricity with average fuel consumption of 2.0 l/100km the 16 months I have owned it, that include 2 longer trips of 700km with average fuel consumption of 4.0 l/100km and some charging problems last winter. The car have 200hp, so would have been a lot more if not hybrid.
ed_balls 8y ago
I depends on you location and driving in the city e.g. Prius can have less total CO2 emission than Tesla S if the electricity comes from fossil fuels. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM
- tomp 8y ago
  I find that hard to believe. So you're saying that Prius, despite being more complicated (as it needs to route both internal combustion and electric power to the wheels), has an electric motor/transmission more efficient than Tesla and internal combustion engine more efficient than power plants? The only way I think that's possible is if weight is taken into account, Prius seems to be a bit smaller and thus possibly lighter than Model S...
  - curlypaul924 8y ago

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

The graphic hides the fact that energy consumption and pollution are extremely correlated with income. There is no meaningful "average" child, or average lifestyle, to base the last column on. No, I'm not implying that we shouldn't decrease population, just pointing out energy inequality. Also the chart severely underestimate the impact of diet.

adask 8y ago

This is a good illustration. People should look at it not only from their personal POV, but in terms of general policies regarding population size... There are parts of the world (for example, Africa) where population has been increasing ridiculously fast for decades and the estimates are that this will continue. A lot of this is thanks to the financial support from the West. When there's news that the population of Japan is decreasing people talk about it as if it's a catastrophe. But Japan is very densely populated right now and I think they'll be fine either way (maybe some short term economic struggles, but they won't go extinct). These topics can be politically taboo, but they shouldn't be. These issues are too important and long term effects can be catastrophic for the environment and the general quality of life on Earth.

rekado 8y ago
> There are parts of the world (for example, Africa) where population has been increasing ridiculously [...] Africa is big, so it's a very coarse way of narrowing down a location. Population pressure is a multiplier, so people in poor countries with few cars and a diet that does not depend on cross-country transport of food have a smaller impact on environment than fewer people accustomed to a more expensive life style. > When there's news that the population of Japan is decreasing people talk about it as if it's a catastrophe. An aging or decreasing population can be a catastrophe, but not because of environmental effects; the concerns are of a social nature, as a shrinking population usually means a reduction in essential services. The one child policy that was active for years in China has left a characteristic mark on the demographics, leading to a small population of young people supporting a large population of old people.

sridca 8y ago

I eat exclusively meat, but I am childfree and own no vehicles. That's make my contribution superior to the average vegan, yes?