4 ms·
Two points: 1. Climate Change and Environmentalism are usually conflated and used interchangeably. They are two different concepts - climate change is about pu
by martythemaniak 5y ago
Two points:
1. Climate Change and Environmentalism are usually conflated and used interchangeably. They are two different concepts - climate change is about putting excess carbon in the atmosphere, faster than the earth can re-absorb it. Environmentalism is a moral judgement on how much resources humans are entitled to consume.
For example, I can drive an EV powered by nuclear power and live in a large detached house. There are no carbon emissions, but I consume lots of resources. People may disagree with my taking up so much land, but that doesn't mean I'm changing the climate while taking up land.
2. We do not need to emit carbon to enjoy high standards of living. Our usage of fossil fuels to power our lifestyles is a historical leftover. We did it because our primitive technology made it easy and and cheap to level-up civilization by burning them. And we did. But today, we can use more advanced technology to stop emitting carbon.
So climate change will be solved with advanced technology, allowing us to replace all instances of carbon in all areas of the economy, which will take decades, but is quite doable. We will still take up land, consume resources etc. Asking (and eventually mandating) that people switch technologies is reasonable. Asking that people give up their lifestyles isn't. It is so unreasonable, you can take it as a given that it just won't happen.
Moral judgements are important and we should consider our broader impact, but such a thing cannot be "solved", we can only work on convincing other people of our position gradually over time.
- threatofrain 5y agoClimate change is a subset of environmentalism, and climate change and environmentalism are both moral issues because they both involve narratives of escalating harms to human life. This is the impact by which they call others to action.
- jorgen123 5y agoThis narrative is not bad, but also not quite good. It is good because it is positive and expresses confidence that we can do this. It is bad in where it ignores the emissions caused by land use and resource consumption. Those are not addressed with advanced technology. Those are addressed oftentimes by going back from advanced technology - but in a way that does improve life styles and wellbeing of the people providing you with resources. You can play a role by choosing those resources - which does put you in the place of having to do some amount of moral judgement. Source: https://regeneration.org https://regeneration.org
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago>For example, I can drive an EV powered by nuclear power and live in a large detached house. Not yet you can't. There is a lot of embedded energy in both of those products. >So climate change will be solved with advanced technology I'm not sure the same thinking that got us into this situation will get us out of it.