6 ms·

The takeaway I see here is that we're looking at putting people, on Earth, in environmental suits, because we collectively haven't been able to agree on how (or

The takeaway I see here is that we're looking at putting people, on Earth, in environmental suits, because we collectively haven't been able to agree on how (or whether, for that matter) to stop making it uninhabitable.

falcolas 5y ago
Technological solutions to discomfort can be done fairly easily at an individual level (though it may not be affordable to all). Solutions to our runaway climate change need to occur at corporate and government levels. Once you identify which is easier (to implement and/or to monetize), it makes an unfortunate kind of sense.
- ehnto 5y ago
  The only lever we have as a society is regulation, and that is only because it has the capacity to change where people can make money. See what happens in countries where green energy is cheaper, it booms. It's not because they love the planet, it's because they can save or make money. There is zero chance corporations will suddenly have a long-term outlook on saving the planet and decide on their own to cut emissions, so we can forget that angle. There was always a lot of talk about carbon taxes, but since we're somewhat past that point now, what about a carbon capture rebate as well? If you can make money from thin air, I'm sure carbon capture technology and industry would boom. If a company can't avoid carbon tax from it's process, which some products simply can't, it then has to offset that tax with carbon capture rebates to be profitable and exist in society. If the math doesn't make sense, they don't make the money, so sad, tears in the unseasonable rain.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. Sure there might be some laws you begrudgingly put up with because of the risk vs reward but making a lot of people do that at scale that doesn't work well. Convincing people to voluntarily do what you want is far cheaper than violence or threat of violence and it comes with a much lower risk of you being shot in the hole you just dug.
    - falcolas 5y ago
      > you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor Funny, the first three are covered by laws and regulations - local and international. I'm less certain about the conflict diamonds, but I believe there are regulations around those too. > Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps That's because there are enough people who value money and power that they will never do the right thing unless forced. The tragedy of the commons, as it is. The Meditations on Moloch paper covers quite a bit of this.
    - ehnto 5y ago
      I'm talking about regulating corporations, taxes, tariffs, trade restrictions, material bans and so on, maybe that wasn't clear in my argument or maybe I don't quite understand yours? But even on an individual level, money is still a huge guiding factor for society in general, so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. > The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. People do all these things, knowingly ignoring all the externalities of their actions. The world is full of decent human beings, and yet the above is still true. Just look at the roads, we're all thoroughly aware that cars pollute our cities even in the immediate tense, let alone long term, yet the roads are still full. Let's not blame the individual for industrial pollution anyway, since the majority of emissions are still from industrial activity. People have marginal agency on changing that. What's a consumer going to do about bunker fuel in shipping ships? How am I going to influence the processes used in steel mills?
      - dempseye 5y ago
        Regulations on corporations are ultimately backed up by threats of violence too.
- LorenPechtel 5y ago
  No, because of the need to power such systems. Putting a long duration powerpack on an environmental suit is going to be a problem! There was a cave in Mexico (AFIAK now underwater) where they ended up using plain ice as the cooling medium for environmental suits.
robcohen 5y ago
In the Marine Corps I used to run 8 miles a few days a week in direct sunlight in southern california. It wasn't even particularly humid, and I'd still get perilously close to heat exhaustion. Then I realized I could put a large icepack under my close-fitting camelback. Instant portable AC. This hack alone made a shocking difference in my performance.
- sbate1987 5y ago
  thanks this is a great idea - I discovered this last summer... This really does work - I had to keep an icepack in my bag to keep my emergency protein bar from melting on my all day bike rides and I realized how much cooler I was from just that tiny bit - but then I have the condensation issue.
- LorenPechtel 5y ago
  Interesting idea! Hiking I fill my hydration bladder with ice cubes then add water and I slip the whole thing in an insulated bag, but I never thought of using an actual ice brick for cooling. (And in most situations I don't think I would, anyway--too much extra weight. The ice in my pack becomes drinking water later.)

falcolas 5y ago

Technological solutions to discomfort can be done fairly easily at an individual level (though it may not be affordable to all). Solutions to our runaway climate change need to occur at corporate and government levels. Once you identify which is easier (to implement and/or to monetize), it makes an unfortunate kind of sense.

ehnto 5y ago
The only lever we have as a society is regulation, and that is only because it has the capacity to change where people can make money. See what happens in countries where green energy is cheaper, it booms. It's not because they love the planet, it's because they can save or make money. There is zero chance corporations will suddenly have a long-term outlook on saving the planet and decide on their own to cut emissions, so we can forget that angle. There was always a lot of talk about carbon taxes, but since we're somewhat past that point now, what about a carbon capture rebate as well? If you can make money from thin air, I'm sure carbon capture technology and industry would boom. If a company can't avoid carbon tax from it's process, which some products simply can't, it then has to offset that tax with carbon capture rebates to be profitable and exist in society. If the math doesn't make sense, they don't make the money, so sad, tears in the unseasonable rain.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. Sure there might be some laws you begrudgingly put up with because of the risk vs reward but making a lot of people do that at scale that doesn't work well. Convincing people to voluntarily do what you want is far cheaper than violence or threat of violence and it comes with a much lower risk of you being shot in the hole you just dug.
  - falcolas 5y ago
    > you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor Funny, the first three are covered by laws and regulations - local and international. I'm less certain about the conflict diamonds, but I believe there are regulations around those too. > Saying the only lever we have is regulation is just saying the only lever we have is violence but with an extra intermediary steps That's because there are enough people who value money and power that they will never do the right thing unless forced. The tragedy of the commons, as it is. The Meditations on Moloch paper covers quite a bit of this.
  - ehnto 5y ago
    I'm talking about regulating corporations, taxes, tariffs, trade restrictions, material bans and so on, maybe that wasn't clear in my argument or maybe I don't quite understand yours? But even on an individual level, money is still a huge guiding factor for society in general, so taxing certain items even at the individual sale level could influence things. Putting fuel in your car? 10% carbon tax, both you and the corporation paid a tax, that goes into the coffer to pay for other kinds of more active carbon reduction programs. > The reason you don't litter, dump used oil down the toilet, buy conflict diamonds and complain when Nike gets caught using sweatshop labor isn't because some jackbooted thug will put you in a cage, it's because you know it's the right thing to do. People do all these things, knowingly ignoring all the externalities of their actions. The world is full of decent human beings, and yet the above is still true. Just look at the roads, we're all thoroughly aware that cars pollute our cities even in the immediate tense, let alone long term, yet the roads are still full. Let's not blame the individual for industrial pollution anyway, since the majority of emissions are still from industrial activity. People have marginal agency on changing that. What's a consumer going to do about bunker fuel in shipping ships? How am I going to influence the processes used in steel mills?
    - dempseye 5y ago
      Regulations on corporations are ultimately backed up by threats of violence too.
LorenPechtel 5y ago
No, because of the need to power such systems. Putting a long duration powerpack on an environmental suit is going to be a problem! There was a cave in Mexico (AFIAK now underwater) where they ended up using plain ice as the cooling medium for environmental suits.

robcohen 5y ago

In the Marine Corps I used to run 8 miles a few days a week in direct sunlight in southern california. It wasn't even particularly humid, and I'd still get perilously close to heat exhaustion. Then I realized I could put a large icepack under my close-fitting camelback. Instant portable AC. This hack alone made a shocking difference in my performance.

sbate1987 5y ago
thanks this is a great idea - I discovered this last summer... This really does work - I had to keep an icepack in my bag to keep my emergency protein bar from melting on my all day bike rides and I realized how much cooler I was from just that tiny bit - but then I have the condensation issue.
LorenPechtel 5y ago
Interesting idea! Hiking I fill my hydration bladder with ice cubes then add water and I slip the whole thing in an insulated bag, but I never thought of using an actual ice brick for cooling. (And in most situations I don't think I would, anyway--too much extra weight. The ice in my pack becomes drinking water later.)