4 ms·
You could flip it round and say that's why the US is lagging behind the EU in environmental protection and consumer rights. I suspect the correct answer is som
by remus 4y ago
You could flip it round and say that's why the US is lagging behind the EU in environmental protection and consumer rights.
I suspect the correct answer is somewhere between the two approaches.
- School-Cotton 4y agoThe amount by which the EU is better than the US in environmental protection is basically a rounding error relative to what’s actually necessary to stop climate change. You might as well say they’re equal.
- _abox 4y agoClimate change is far from the only environmental problem have. Sure, it's the biggest but also the biggest to solve. And the EU has had a consistent push to solve it, unlike the US, which for instance during the Trump era pulled out of the Paris accord.
- blue_light_man 4y agoThe solution for climate change would come from technology. Not random politicians virtue signalling and signing useless agreements which doesn't make any meaningful difference.
- p_j_w 4y agoWe've known about climate change for decades and global CO2 output has only increased. Just assuming technology will solve it is foolish.
- palata 4y agoTechnology is the problem, not the solution. Doing more technology increases the problem, as can been seen from the data over the last decades. What you're looking for is magic. Magic would solve it.
- GekkePrutser 4y agoI'm surprised people still bring up carbon capture tech as a solution. It happens a lot around here lately but it's just such wishful thinking IMO. If you have that much carbon-neutral energy, carbon-neutral materials, space, maintenance to really make a dent... And all those things don't displace green resources that could have been used for other necessary things instead... You wouldn't have had any problem to begin with. See how much shit we get here when we get a few % less natural gas here in Europe. We're in a huge crisis over just that. That's a promille of what we'd need to capture enough carbon for 0.01 degree cooling. It's just some distraction from the hard things that are needed to solve it. And a big paycheck for the industry behind it obviously.
- palata 4y agoIt's simpler to think "technology will save us" than "we as a species screwed up and have already destroyed 2/3 of wild life (not talking about the consequences of global warming, that's yet to come), maybe we should change drastically".