5 ms·

Then there should be consequences for destroying environment and making earth inhabitable for humans. Oil industry knew that burning fossil fuels will lead to g

by sobkas 3y ago

Then there should be consequences for destroying environment and making earth inhabitable for humans. Oil industry knew that burning fossil fuels will lead to global warming. Plastic industry knew that recycling is a total sham, and most of it will at best end up on a landfill at worts everywhere including our food. They knew but then they lied to us to make more profits. Maybe we should take that ill gotten profits from them and if it will bankrupt them so be it. Because we're slowly getting out of time to do anything.

civilized 3y ago
I think developed nations collectively bought into fossil fuel-driven civilization, so it seems like scapegoating to lay all the blame at the feet of the producers. But like you say, it is appropriate to blame the producers for hiding what they knew about the greenhouse effect and well-funded lobbying and propaganda campaigns to deny and minimize it.
- mdgrech23 3y ago
  I think is the uncomfortable truth is we're all to blame for a certain extent. People def hide evidence and acted to their own benefit but to a certain extent so many of us were known accomplices.
- UncleMeat 3y ago
  It is true that the people demanded the lifestyle provided by fossil fuel emissions. But corporations didn't just say "oh if you insist." When new policies and regulations are attempted that will not affect the lifestyle of the people but will eat into corporate profits, they fight tooth and nail. An honest corporation that was just acting to serve the needs of the people wouldn't do something like fight to reduce the exxon valdez spill fine by 100x or raise a fit when regulatory agencies mandate generation shifting.
  - coding123 3y ago
    I think we've KNOWN what this shit does to the air and water for at least, what 40 years? At what point do we blame ourselves to increasing fossil fuel usage, even in the what, past 5 years?
    - notjoemama 3y ago
      All boats float: Let’s partner with oil companies to collectively solve carbon capture at planet scale? They get to keep functioning, citizens & government helps with subsidization and research programs. Put a time limit on progress and penalize the oil companies by making fines exponentially rise by time if possible and unmet. A select subcommittee can oversee the process and politicians can coordinate partnerships with other countries. You need BOTH the carrot AND the stick to get behaviors to change.
    - UncleMeat 3y ago
      I think that we can also reasonably blame people who use a disproportionate amount of electricity for their harm caused to the planet. I don't think that some sort of redistribution effort that accounts for past harm is impossible. But I also think that the effect of even a megamillionaire who takes a private jet everywhere is dwarfed by the effect of corporate leadership, lobbying, and legal teams who successfully undo regulation via the courts and legislatures so that they can make more profits.
    - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
      > we blame ourselves So I buy shrimp that was grown locally. Then I read up that shrimps were transported to the other side of the world, peeled there, and shipped back, travelled 20,000 miles, before landong on my plate. I buy canned pairs, and turns out the same story. What am I suppose to do, starve? The capitalist machine prioritises fictitious resource of money, over real resource of oil. It wastes huge amount of enegy just to take advantage of a poor country's low wages. I drive an ebike to work. You can go vegan, quit heating your house, take cold showers, none of it will make any difference if the industry does not change it's practices.
      - kjkjadksj 3y ago
- trashtester 3y ago
  If the world stopped consuming fossil fuels today, overpopulation would no longer be an issue in about a year or two. Because 90% of the population would die.
  - 4ggr0 3y ago
    Well you don't have to stop in a matter of one day, because that's impossible and unrealistic anyways, but we could at least finally start with reducing our consumption, with the goal to land as close as possible to 0 as soon as possible. Then again, we missed the window to stop long ago. So why bother anyways, right?
    - trashtester 3y ago
      My main point is that demonizing the use of hydrocarbons is absurd. Our use of them is one of the main reasons we've been going from a world where most people was incredibly poor 200 years ago, to most of the world's population living in relative prosperity today (compared to 200 years ago). Now that we're developing alternative energy sources, we should start/continue to move away from fossil fuels, but if we try to do it too quickly, the price may be higher than the benefit.
  - ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
    That seems to be an excuse that's been in use for decades. Meanwhile, we're just dragging our feet about stopping oil use and kicking the can down the road for the next generation to deal with. Ultimately, it's a very poor excuse to state that because we can't stop immediately, that we might as well continue digging as much oil as possible out of the ground for burning.
    - User23 3y ago
      There’s no credible path for reducing carbon emissions enough to reverse warming under current models that doesn’t involve gigadeaths.
      - 3y ago
- bannedbybros 3y ago
  [dead]
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  so you think its a collecrive decision made by all of us with full knowledge, and fossil fuel companies are just doing what the consumer wants? Then why do journalists investifating recycling sham, oil spills, etc. frequently end up dead or in prison?
UncleMeat 3y ago
It is unfortunately very hard to address this with suits and getting even harder. Rules around standing can be leveraged to deny suits and the power of administrative agencies keeps getting hamstrung by the new major questions doctrine. Montana is the only state that guarantees a right to a clean environment in its constitution, but conservatives are seeing how this can be leveraged against polluting industries and are mobilizing to remove this right. Megacorps have a tremendous amount of power in our political system and that makes it very very very difficult to hold people to account for anything.
throwaway71271 3y ago
As Jacques Ellul says (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCtu-rXfPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCtu-rXfPk): when the bridge collapses, who is to blame?
hhthrowaway1230 3y ago
Someone is trying to do that https://www.stopecocide.earth https://www.stopecocide.earth
nancyhn 3y ago
Why do fewer climate related deaths; down 98% the past century and a more green planet than a century ago and far fewer people in poverty all lead you to believe it's becoming uninhabitable?
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  because half of bees are gone, half of barrier reef is gone, 75% of insects are gone, UK has like 10% tree cover left, emperor penguins, had zero chicks survive Do you think you can survive if the biosphere is gone?
  - nancyhn 3y ago
    In 2022, the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) reported the highest levels of coral cover across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) in over 36 years.
- tremon 3y ago
  Why is the planet more green today than a century ago? Perhaps because of all the chemical-induced algae blooms turning previously blue water into murky green?
  - nancyhn 3y ago
    There were an estimated 750 billion trees worldwide in the 1920s. We now have approximately 3.04 trillion trees in the world.
jacquesm 3y ago
What amazes me is that you just can't opt out, short of jumping off a cliff. Everything you do involves the destruction of non-renewable resources. If you look at what you produce in terms of garbage and other waste every month it is completely insane. Everything is packaged in plastic, high grade cardboard, glass etc. The amount of energy and materials required is ridiculous. And yet, not a month goes by or something that used to be packaged in paper suddenly is only available in plastic, something that was available in re-usable glass is only available in plastic and so on. The hold-outs seem to be beer bottles but I don't drink beer...
- MaxHoppersGhost 3y ago
  > If you look at what you produce in terms of garbage and other waste every month it is completely insane. Everything is packaged in plastic, high grade cardboard, glass etc. This has bothered me since I was a child and drove by a landfill and realized just how much trash we produce. I met someone that went a month without using one time use plastic and she couldn’t really avoid it. It’s everywhere.

by sobkas 3y ago

civilized 3y ago

I think developed nations collectively bought into fossil fuel-driven civilization, so it seems like scapegoating to lay all the blame at the feet of the producers. But like you say, it is appropriate to blame the producers for hiding what they knew about the greenhouse effect and well-funded lobbying and propaganda campaigns to deny and minimize it.

mdgrech23 3y ago
I think is the uncomfortable truth is we're all to blame for a certain extent. People def hide evidence and acted to their own benefit but to a certain extent so many of us were known accomplices.
UncleMeat 3y ago
It is true that the people demanded the lifestyle provided by fossil fuel emissions. But corporations didn't just say "oh if you insist." When new policies and regulations are attempted that will not affect the lifestyle of the people but will eat into corporate profits, they fight tooth and nail. An honest corporation that was just acting to serve the needs of the people wouldn't do something like fight to reduce the exxon valdez spill fine by 100x or raise a fit when regulatory agencies mandate generation shifting.
- coding123 3y ago
  I think we've KNOWN what this shit does to the air and water for at least, what 40 years? At what point do we blame ourselves to increasing fossil fuel usage, even in the what, past 5 years?
  - notjoemama 3y ago
    All boats float: Let’s partner with oil companies to collectively solve carbon capture at planet scale? They get to keep functioning, citizens & government helps with subsidization and research programs. Put a time limit on progress and penalize the oil companies by making fines exponentially rise by time if possible and unmet. A select subcommittee can oversee the process and politicians can coordinate partnerships with other countries. You need BOTH the carrot AND the stick to get behaviors to change.
  - UncleMeat 3y ago
    I think that we can also reasonably blame people who use a disproportionate amount of electricity for their harm caused to the planet. I don't think that some sort of redistribution effort that accounts for past harm is impossible. But I also think that the effect of even a megamillionaire who takes a private jet everywhere is dwarfed by the effect of corporate leadership, lobbying, and legal teams who successfully undo regulation via the courts and legislatures so that they can make more profits.
  - ClumsyPilot 3y ago
    > we blame ourselves So I buy shrimp that was grown locally. Then I read up that shrimps were transported to the other side of the world, peeled there, and shipped back, travelled 20,000 miles, before landong on my plate. I buy canned pairs, and turns out the same story. What am I suppose to do, starve? The capitalist machine prioritises fictitious resource of money, over real resource of oil. It wastes huge amount of enegy just to take advantage of a poor country's low wages. I drive an ebike to work. You can go vegan, quit heating your house, take cold showers, none of it will make any difference if the industry does not change it's practices.
    - kjkjadksj 3y ago
trashtester 3y ago
If the world stopped consuming fossil fuels today, overpopulation would no longer be an issue in about a year or two. Because 90% of the population would die.
- 4ggr0 3y ago
  Well you don't have to stop in a matter of one day, because that's impossible and unrealistic anyways, but we could at least finally start with reducing our consumption, with the goal to land as close as possible to 0 as soon as possible. Then again, we missed the window to stop long ago. So why bother anyways, right?
  - trashtester 3y ago
    My main point is that demonizing the use of hydrocarbons is absurd. Our use of them is one of the main reasons we've been going from a world where most people was incredibly poor 200 years ago, to most of the world's population living in relative prosperity today (compared to 200 years ago). Now that we're developing alternative energy sources, we should start/continue to move away from fossil fuels, but if we try to do it too quickly, the price may be higher than the benefit.
- ndsipa_pomu 3y ago
  That seems to be an excuse that's been in use for decades. Meanwhile, we're just dragging our feet about stopping oil use and kicking the can down the road for the next generation to deal with. Ultimately, it's a very poor excuse to state that because we can't stop immediately, that we might as well continue digging as much oil as possible out of the ground for burning.
  - User23 3y ago
    There’s no credible path for reducing carbon emissions enough to reverse warming under current models that doesn’t involve gigadeaths.
    - 3y ago
bannedbybros 3y ago
[dead]
ClumsyPilot 3y ago
so you think its a collecrive decision made by all of us with full knowledge, and fossil fuel companies are just doing what the consumer wants? Then why do journalists investifating recycling sham, oil spills, etc. frequently end up dead or in prison?

UncleMeat 3y ago

It is unfortunately very hard to address this with suits and getting even harder. Rules around standing can be leveraged to deny suits and the power of administrative agencies keeps getting hamstrung by the new major questions doctrine. Montana is the only state that guarantees a right to a clean environment in its constitution, but conservatives are seeing how this can be leveraged against polluting industries and are mobilizing to remove this right. Megacorps have a tremendous amount of power in our political system and that makes it very very very difficult to hold people to account for anything.

throwaway71271 3y ago

As Jacques Ellul says (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCtu-rXfPk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOCtu-rXfPk): when the bridge collapses, who is to blame?

hhthrowaway1230 3y ago

Someone is trying to do that https://www.stopecocide.earth https://www.stopecocide.earth

nancyhn 3y ago

Why do fewer climate related deaths; down 98% the past century and a more green planet than a century ago and far fewer people in poverty all lead you to believe it's becoming uninhabitable?

ClumsyPilot 3y ago
because half of bees are gone, half of barrier reef is gone, 75% of insects are gone, UK has like 10% tree cover left, emperor penguins, had zero chicks survive Do you think you can survive if the biosphere is gone?
- nancyhn 3y ago
  In 2022, the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) reported the highest levels of coral cover across two-thirds of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) in over 36 years.
tremon 3y ago
Why is the planet more green today than a century ago? Perhaps because of all the chemical-induced algae blooms turning previously blue water into murky green?
- nancyhn 3y ago
  There were an estimated 750 billion trees worldwide in the 1920s. We now have approximately 3.04 trillion trees in the world.

jacquesm 3y ago

What amazes me is that you just can't opt out, short of jumping off a cliff. Everything you do involves the destruction of non-renewable resources. If you look at what you produce in terms of garbage and other waste every month it is completely insane. Everything is packaged in plastic, high grade cardboard, glass etc. The amount of energy and materials required is ridiculous. And yet, not a month goes by or something that used to be packaged in paper suddenly is only available in plastic, something that was available in re-usable glass is only available in plastic and so on. The hold-outs seem to be beer bottles but I don't drink beer...

MaxHoppersGhost 3y ago
> If you look at what you produce in terms of garbage and other waste every month it is completely insane. Everything is packaged in plastic, high grade cardboard, glass etc. This has bothered me since I was a child and drove by a landfill and realized just how much trash we produce. I met someone that went a month without using one time use plastic and she couldn’t really avoid it. It’s everywhere.