4 ms·
Sometimes substractive approaches work better than additive ones. It may not be about what else you can do, but what things that you are doing you may stop to d
by gmuslera 4y ago
Sometimes substractive approaches work better than additive ones. It may not be about what else you can do, but what things that you are doing you may stop to do so to push a change. Less consumption, travel, driving and so on, done on scale, may eventually hit the ones that do the biggest damages.
2020 was the biggest setback to some of the most nasty trends in recent years because we collectively did a lot less on those and other categories.
- llsf 4y ago2020 was a setback. 2020 was forced on us, and there is no way that any country would willing decide to apply such a setback on itself, voluntarily for the sake of saving the planet. The tricky part is to find a path that does not impede the economy and yet reduces the CO2 (to zero or even start capturing it). Most of the CO2 emissions are linked to fossil fuel, and so the economy in general. We are addict to fossil fuel. Fossil fuel is the life blood of all the economies. There is a say that there are 2 ways to limit your consumption: 1. You are willing to reduce your consumption => Sobriety 2. The consumption reduction because you cannot afford => Poverty Sobriety is hard, but as time passes, the climate consequences are getting more expensive. If we ignore sobriety, we will eventually fell in poverty as fossil fuel is a limited resource and we will not be able to afford it for ever. The sooner we get rid of it, the better. To govern is to foresee. Our government should plan accordingly.