5 ms·

The leak is a cost of doing business of delivering gas to YOU the consumer. So the leak is actually part of your carbon footprint.

ajmurmann 5y ago
But I have no control over the leak part. I have no option to pay more to close the leak. In fact, most consumers don't even know about the leak. So I'm entirely unable to make a choice. It's irrational to expect that anyone would prefer to go vegan over just fixing these leaks. This problem will remain till we have a proper carbon tax globally.
- mrtksn 5y ago
  You can always vote for the politicians that are willing to go after the gas leaks, you can choose to buy from companies that are sourcing from leak-free gas pipes or use renewable energy sources etc. Just because you don't have direct access to the pipelines so you can close the leaks with your bare hands doesn't mean that you have no power over it. None of us have any control beyond 2 meters of our existence because that's how far away we can reach with our hands but because we live in a society the things we say or choices we make have impact everywhere on the globe. That's also why we can eat things that are further away than a few meters from us and the leak in question is from the machinery that facilitates all that.
  - ajmurmann 5y ago
    > You can always vote for the politicians that are willing to go after the gas leaks, you can choose to buy from companies that are sourcing from leak-free gas pipes or use renewable energy sources etc. None of these things are true for me. I'm not allowed to vote where I live and even if I could, the US election system doesn't offer a practical voice that reflects this (the broken voting method is arguably is the biggest problem the US needs to solve). I also only have a doctor gas company. So my alternative would be to switch my furnace, water heater and stove to electric. That's actually on my wishlist, but now we are talking significant money. People who live in apartments or even condos likely at best have control over the stove. Edit: to be clear, I'm not saying that individuals shouldn't take responsibility. In fact I've moved to a largely vegan diet both due to carbon emissions and animal cruelty concerns. I feel guilty every day and wonder if my positive contributions outweigh the damage that my existence does to our environment and the harm and pain climate change will ultimately cause for other people as well as coastal cities behind uninhabitable, we see unrest over climate refugees, famines, etc.
vlovich123 5y ago
This assumes the leaks are unavoidable. They’re not. There’s lots of technology the companies can use to find and fix the leaks. However the lack of regulation/enforced regulation means that it’s a race to the bottom. When I see these companies being proactive and pressing for legislation that raises the bar, I’ll buy the personal responsibility argument a little more.
pokot0 5y ago
I think the point is that the leaks are only hunted and fixed if it is economically beneficial and not environmental beneficial. This is something that the consumer has no direct control over. Leaks are not required to provide me gas. It's just an unfortunate side effect that can be addressed and drastically reduced if prioritized.
whimsicalism 5y ago
This is what infuriates me about those so quick to criticize the "personal footprint" concept. All of these things are done so that you can be provided with cheaper consumer goods. It's not some entity entirely divorced from your own complicity.
- autoexec 5y ago
  > All of these things are done so that you can be provided with cheaper consumer goods Why would you assume that irresponsible practices that are bad for the environment but save companies money always reduce the price for the consumer when they could keep raising the price of their goods to the highest price point the consumer will tolerate and simply pocket the money they save by destroying the environment.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    Because most of these emissions are for producing commodities which are generally heavily competed on price.
    - autoexec 5y ago
      doubtful, but even when that's true you still don't have to reduce prices by the same amount as you save harming the environment. You only have to make your prices competitive with everyone else. It's why collusion and price fixing exist.
themaninthedark 5y ago
Foxcon's worker's deaths are a cost of doing business of delivering iPhones to YOU the consumer. Their blood is on YOUR hands. Or you know, Foxcon and the pipeline companies are responsible for what they do. Add in the fact that we have regulators and environmental regulations that we voted for and funded to try and stop things like this shows that the average person does not want this to happen.
- gruez 5y ago
  >Foxcon's worker's deaths are a cost of doing business of delivering iPhones to YOU the consumer. Their blood is on YOUR hands. Is it not? If you buy conflict diamonds do you get to wash your hands and say "there isn't any blood on my hands because it's the local warlord's choice to use child soldiers, not mine"?
  - themaninthedark 5y ago
    Do people go out of the way to buy conflict diamonds? or is it more people try to buy cheap diamonds? Even if you don't go looking for cheap diamonds, how can you be sure your diamond is conflict free? >"Nearly nine years after the Kimberley Process was launched, the sad truth is that most consumers still cannot be sure where their diamonds come from", Global Witness founding director Charmian Gooch told BBC World Service's World Business Report. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16027011 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16027011 For fungible goods, you can not guarantee where and what made the product you are using. That is why we (try) to have systems in place to do so.
    - gruez 5y ago
      > Do people go out of the way to buy conflict diamonds? or is it more people try to buy cheap diamonds? I don't think apple is going out of their way to find sweatshops either. >Even if you don't go looking for cheap diamonds, how can you be sure your diamond is conflict free? Are you arguing for nihilism here? ie. "we can't really be sure that even conflict free diamonds are conflict free, so it's fine for me to buy diamonds from a random diamond dealer in Sierra Leone"?

ajmurmann 5y ago

But I have no control over the leak part. I have no option to pay more to close the leak. In fact, most consumers don't even know about the leak. So I'm entirely unable to make a choice. It's irrational to expect that anyone would prefer to go vegan over just fixing these leaks. This problem will remain till we have a proper carbon tax globally.

mrtksn 5y ago
You can always vote for the politicians that are willing to go after the gas leaks, you can choose to buy from companies that are sourcing from leak-free gas pipes or use renewable energy sources etc. Just because you don't have direct access to the pipelines so you can close the leaks with your bare hands doesn't mean that you have no power over it. None of us have any control beyond 2 meters of our existence because that's how far away we can reach with our hands but because we live in a society the things we say or choices we make have impact everywhere on the globe. That's also why we can eat things that are further away than a few meters from us and the leak in question is from the machinery that facilitates all that.
- ajmurmann 5y ago
  > You can always vote for the politicians that are willing to go after the gas leaks, you can choose to buy from companies that are sourcing from leak-free gas pipes or use renewable energy sources etc. None of these things are true for me. I'm not allowed to vote where I live and even if I could, the US election system doesn't offer a practical voice that reflects this (the broken voting method is arguably is the biggest problem the US needs to solve). I also only have a doctor gas company. So my alternative would be to switch my furnace, water heater and stove to electric. That's actually on my wishlist, but now we are talking significant money. People who live in apartments or even condos likely at best have control over the stove. Edit: to be clear, I'm not saying that individuals shouldn't take responsibility. In fact I've moved to a largely vegan diet both due to carbon emissions and animal cruelty concerns. I feel guilty every day and wonder if my positive contributions outweigh the damage that my existence does to our environment and the harm and pain climate change will ultimately cause for other people as well as coastal cities behind uninhabitable, we see unrest over climate refugees, famines, etc.

vlovich123 5y ago

This assumes the leaks are unavoidable. They’re not. There’s lots of technology the companies can use to find and fix the leaks. However the lack of regulation/enforced regulation means that it’s a race to the bottom. When I see these companies being proactive and pressing for legislation that raises the bar, I’ll buy the personal responsibility argument a little more.

pokot0 5y ago

I think the point is that the leaks are only hunted and fixed if it is economically beneficial and not environmental beneficial. This is something that the consumer has no direct control over. Leaks are not required to provide me gas. It's just an unfortunate side effect that can be addressed and drastically reduced if prioritized.

whimsicalism 5y ago

This is what infuriates me about those so quick to criticize the "personal footprint" concept. All of these things are done so that you can be provided with cheaper consumer goods. It's not some entity entirely divorced from your own complicity.

autoexec 5y ago
> All of these things are done so that you can be provided with cheaper consumer goods Why would you assume that irresponsible practices that are bad for the environment but save companies money always reduce the price for the consumer when they could keep raising the price of their goods to the highest price point the consumer will tolerate and simply pocket the money they save by destroying the environment.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  Because most of these emissions are for producing commodities which are generally heavily competed on price.
  - autoexec 5y ago
    doubtful, but even when that's true you still don't have to reduce prices by the same amount as you save harming the environment. You only have to make your prices competitive with everyone else. It's why collusion and price fixing exist.

themaninthedark 5y ago

Foxcon's worker's deaths are a cost of doing business of delivering iPhones to YOU the consumer. Their blood is on YOUR hands. Or you know, Foxcon and the pipeline companies are responsible for what they do. Add in the fact that we have regulators and environmental regulations that we voted for and funded to try and stop things like this shows that the average person does not want this to happen.

gruez 5y ago
>Foxcon's worker's deaths are a cost of doing business of delivering iPhones to YOU the consumer. Their blood is on YOUR hands. Is it not? If you buy conflict diamonds do you get to wash your hands and say "there isn't any blood on my hands because it's the local warlord's choice to use child soldiers, not mine"?
- themaninthedark 5y ago
  Do people go out of the way to buy conflict diamonds? or is it more people try to buy cheap diamonds? Even if you don't go looking for cheap diamonds, how can you be sure your diamond is conflict free? >"Nearly nine years after the Kimberley Process was launched, the sad truth is that most consumers still cannot be sure where their diamonds come from", Global Witness founding director Charmian Gooch told BBC World Service's World Business Report. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16027011 https://www.bbc.com/news/business-16027011 For fungible goods, you can not guarantee where and what made the product you are using. That is why we (try) to have systems in place to do so.
  - gruez 5y ago
    > Do people go out of the way to buy conflict diamonds? or is it more people try to buy cheap diamonds? I don't think apple is going out of their way to find sweatshops either. >Even if you don't go looking for cheap diamonds, how can you be sure your diamond is conflict free? Are you arguing for nihilism here? ie. "we can't really be sure that even conflict free diamonds are conflict free, so it's fine for me to buy diamonds from a random diamond dealer in Sierra Leone"?