5 ms·
Climate change is not political
by derg 7y ago
Climate change is not political
- parsnips 7y agoWhen socialism is the solution, seems like it is.
- derg 7y agoStating the current effects of climate change (and any future effects) !== [x] socio-economic and political system is the answer.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- parsnips 7y agoAlso US CO2 emissions are down since 2000, thanks to fracking. When you go to bed fearing climate change, thank a Republican for lowering US CO2 emissions.
- ctrl-j 7y agoFracking might be helping with CO2, but it's also releasing a ton of methane which might not be as bad in the long term but is really really bad in the short term. If we've got a few decades before the point of no return... great! If not.. oh well, it's been a good run I guess? Not to mention the absolute havoc it's wrecking on local environments. It's also only good if it's a stop-gap for renewables.. so I'll thank a republican once they stop blocking measures to improve and subsidize solar, wind, and other clean energy solutions.
- adrianN 7y agoFracking is not a viable path to net-zero emissions, so it doesn't count as a solution.
- parsnips 7y agoSolar is not a viable path for powering the energy needs for the world, it doesn't count as a solution.
- ctrl-j 7y agoFracking isn't renewable and causes massive local environmental problems. Solar needs better batteries. One of these things is not like the other.
- adrianN 7y agoSolar, wind, and storage technology is a viable path for powering the world according to the people who study such things.
- parsnips 7y agoYou're banking on unlikely materials engineering breakthroughs to get solar and wind energy density to be 1000 times more than what it is today. Not 2x improvement, not 10x, not 100x. 1000x improvement before renewables are as efficient as natural gas. Good luck.
- adrianN 7y agoDo you have any source for the 1000x? What do you even mean with "efficient"? Because I'm just proposing to cover 2-5% of the land with wind turbines and solar panels while improving overall energy efficiency through building insulation and a switch to heat pumps and electric cars.
- goda90 7y agoIf you dig down into it politics is about finding solutions to physical problems like limited resources/land/etc, preventing violence, and how to cooperate in order to do more than one human can do alone. That climate change exists and is a physical problem is not political. Solutions to this problem will need to be political in some way or another.
- parsnips 7y agoIt always has existed, and the problems are largely imaginary. Hence the politics.
- ctrl-j 7y agoHow are the problems of melting permafrost, rising sea levels, and volatile weather patterns "largely imaginary"?
- parsnips 7y agoThese are going to occur anyway (along with freezing permafrost, lowering sea levels, stable weather patterns). These are ordinary problems that we adapt to. The problem I'm talking about is the idea that these are preventable. They're not. It's an imaginary problem. The US , for example, can _eliminate_ CO2 production and those things are still going to happen. The imaginary problem is that climate change is a problem to solve.
- ctrl-j 7y ago> These are going to occur anyway How on earth do you know that? > These are ordinary problems that we adapt to. You make it sound like we've been through this before.. When? > The US , for example, can _eliminate_ CO2 production and those things are still going to happen. So, we cranked up the emissions, and these things just RANDOMLY started happening at the same time? Even though our environmental models and knowledge of physics agree with our observations?? Like.. it's just MAGIC or something? What is causing it if it's not CO2?
- adrianN 7y agoHow is for example a carbon tax and rebate system socialism? Sounds like a market driven solution to me.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- defterGoose 7y agoIf only you could convince the deniers of that. Speaking from a US perspective, they seem to think that the "libs" just want to hobble our economy because they hate "success" and "strength" and don't actually believe there is an existential crisis at hand.
- parsnips 7y agoThe US has lowered it's CO2 emissions 10% since 2000. Thanks to the "right" and fracking. 16% in the EU. If you eliminated US/EU production of CO2, atmospheric CO2 levels would still rise. The slight warming that would take place as China and India modernize their life will still happen.
- adrianN 7y agoIf you eliminate US/EU production of CO2, atmospheric CO2 levels would rise 24% slower. If you added in a carbon tax that it levied on imports from countries that don't implement an equivalent system you can bet that China would lower its emissions too. If you're very fancy you can also offer to install alternative energy in foreign countries at cost price.
- parsnips 7y ago>If you eliminate US/EU production of CO2, atmospheric CO2 levels would rise 24% slower. Thank you for confirming my point. >If you added in a carbon tax that it levied on imports from countries that don't implement an equivalent system you can bet that China would lower its emissions too. If you're very fancy you can also offer to install alternative energy in foreign countries at cost price. So the pitch here is... Let's risk war with a Nuclear power with a tariff stick and for a carrot offer a way to a worse standard of living then US/EU. This sounds real viable.
- adrianN 7y agoThe alternative is risking war with a nuclear power for food and land that can be used for agriculture.
- irrational 7y agoEveryone I know that supports Trump is also a climate change denier. Concerns about climate change are liberal propaganda that progressives are trying to use to raise our taxes. It is very very very much political.