3 ms·

One of the most decadent human endavours. As if there were no real problems to fight on this planet. Ironically, the burning of fossile fuels causes one of the

• systemvoltage 5y ago
  Everyday Astronaut did an hour long video on "How Much Do Rockets Pollute? Are They Bad For Our Air?": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4VHfmiwuv4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4VHfmiwuv4 I highly recommend to everyone who is concerned about this. The knee-jerk reaction needs to be toned down a little bit, we need to look at the data first.
  • antfarm 5y ago
    https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires-space-tourism-environment-emissions https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/jul/19/billionaires...
  • tonyedgecombe 5y ago
    I can guarantee Branson's carbon footprint is going to be several orders of magnitude larger than yours or mine. You might argue it is insignificant on the world stage but these things are symbolic. It's going to be hard trying to convince people to lower their footprint when they see the rich and famous behaving as if there isn't problem.
    • garmaine 5y ago
      Or we could not try the impossible task of convincing people to lower their carbon footprint and instead invest in sequestration, sun shields, and geo engineering to eliminate the climate change problem. Austerity will not get us out of this hole.
      • IneffablePigeon 5y ago
        Pour qué no los dos? I mostly agree in the long term, but in some ways analogously to the pandemic strategy of short term mitigation whilst long term solutions are put in place, I see few downsides to trying to stem the flow now by altering behaviour, in order to give us more time to fix the issue properly. There's also a sliding scale - not all things people can do to reduce their footprint are really "austerity" but rather alternatives with a different set of tradeoffs. A sideways move that requires a culture shift. I don't mean this to come across as an attack - I don't know your motivations and I'm guilty of this personally - but IMO most people I talk to who argue your position tend to be doing it as much as a rationalisation of their own behaviour than as a position they've come to from first principles.
        • garmaine 5y ago
          On the moral side, because austerity cuts standard of living worldwide and will drive billions back into poverty traps. On the practical side, because austerity cuts economic growth, and growth is necessary in order to have both the industrial capacity and discretionary funds necessary to take on and complete such a massive project. And I’m sorry, but it did come off as an attack. Let’s leave the ad hominems out of it and engage in good faith discussion.
      • tonyedgecombe 5y ago
        >sequestration, sun shields, and geo engineering All things we have never done at scale. Techno-optimism will not get us out of this hole.
        • garmaine 5y ago
          Which is why we need a lot of resources to perfect and scale. Which right now means increasing average carbon footprint due to our mix of energy sources and industrial technology. This is the equivalent of “you need to spend money to make money.”
  • antfarm 5y ago
    I just mentioned the pollution aspect because of the irony. The real problem in my opinion is how this new space race and the new focus on manned space missions and space colonization distracts the public and some very bright people from acknowledging and working on solving the real global problems that humanity is facing due to our unsustainable lifestyles.