3 ms·

My question about these things is always, "what are we not thinking about?" There's a lot more to environmental responsibility than just carbon. Killing all th

My question about these things is always, "what are we not thinking about?" There's a lot more to environmental responsibility than just carbon. Killing all the fish to reduce carbon isn't an answer. Of course we're not talking about doing that, but aren't we? How do we know? History tells us that government has repeatedly destroyed ecosystems while trying to repair or preserve them. The Grand Canyon, African elephant, countless small lakes and canyons around the US. All of these were well meaning projects to preserve, protect, and repair ecosystems. Responsible environmentalism is far more important than reducing carbon, is my point. So let's do both by asking questions.

trimethylpurine 2y ago
[flagged]
- szvsw 2y ago
  What? It’s extremely unclear what your concrete (ha) questions are. Your questions (while clearly well-meaning and well-intentioned, and probably from a perspective that most people in this discussion generally agree with, including myself) seem generally too broad and disconnected from the more detailed discussion of materials. You mentioned you can’t see the other side of the argument, but it’s unclear what exactly you are arguing for or against in relation to reclaiming cement from concrete versus down cycling concrete into roads. It’s unclear to me what environmental concerns you are talking about that directly relate to the discussion above. There are all sorts of ecological/environmental/social concerns at various stages of the concrete lifecycle, but certainly at a global scale one of the most significant effects is the contribution to climate collapse associated with cement production for concrete (around 10% of global emissions). Concrete however is certainly not going away though as it is one of the primary structural materials in most of the world, especially in parts that are rapidly expanding the building stock, and so doing everything we can to mitigate the resulting carbon emissions is essential, as those emissions pose a dire threat…
  - trimethylpurine 2y ago
    My question was directed at the downvoter.

trimethylpurine 2y ago

[flagged]

szvsw 2y ago
What? It’s extremely unclear what your concrete (ha) questions are. Your questions (while clearly well-meaning and well-intentioned, and probably from a perspective that most people in this discussion generally agree with, including myself) seem generally too broad and disconnected from the more detailed discussion of materials. You mentioned you can’t see the other side of the argument, but it’s unclear what exactly you are arguing for or against in relation to reclaiming cement from concrete versus down cycling concrete into roads. It’s unclear to me what environmental concerns you are talking about that directly relate to the discussion above. There are all sorts of ecological/environmental/social concerns at various stages of the concrete lifecycle, but certainly at a global scale one of the most significant effects is the contribution to climate collapse associated with cement production for concrete (around 10% of global emissions). Concrete however is certainly not going away though as it is one of the primary structural materials in most of the world, especially in parts that are rapidly expanding the building stock, and so doing everything we can to mitigate the resulting carbon emissions is essential, as those emissions pose a dire threat…
- trimethylpurine 2y ago
  My question was directed at the downvoter.