5 ms·
We _are_ doing something about this. We’re locating concentrated millions of years of trapped fossil energy and moving it into our atmosphere as fast as we poss
by Arubis 3mo ago
We _are_ doing something about this. We’re locating concentrated millions of years of trapped fossil energy and moving it into our atmosphere as fast as we possibly can. To a first approximation, that is the world economy.
Or did you mean to do something differently?
- dunWithIt 3mo agoWe have to do less There has been a lot of debate over AC use. Everyone chiming in only discusses runtime energy use. The biggest issue is mining and manufacturing, and the moving of all the materials, parts, and such. Every AC has sheathed wires and circuit boards. Every airplane, car, phone, network router, refrigerator... same expansive mess creation. Gamers complaining about disc less games despite that problem pipeline and waste. Complaining about RAM prices despite the problem pipeline. No one is focused on the lag effects, externalities, of billions using up an endless supply of technologies and dumping airplane smog in the atmosphere. Etc, etc, etc Thermodynamics makes it pretty clear that energy is not gone just hanging out in the atmosphere. Thermodynamics means we may be fucked even if we slow down; that energy in the atmosphere can only go from atmosphere into oceans, glaciers, and permafrost. There's a lot of potential energy in the Earth to release as it absorbs the heat already in the atmosphere
- kennywinker 3mo ago> Gamers complaining about disc less games despite that problem pipeline and waste. Tbf the issue is the user-hostile parameters of buying a diskless game. Most people would be happy to download their games if they could back them up to a thumb drive and never get locked out of them and sell the game when they’re done with it. Seems deeply tangential, but it’s not. Blaming people for wanting a physical thing because the alternative is being further abused by a corporation - that’s a miss. Be mad at game platforms for not offering real ownership in whatever the most climate-friendly way possible. Be mad at governments for not forcing companies to cost in the negative externalities of their business.
- cherrycherry98 3mo agoIf you want less of something, tax it. Support consumption based taxes like the FairTax in the US which would tax new goods at a high rate while used goods would be tax free. This encourages keeping items for longer, repairing rather than replacing, and purchasing used goods over new ones.
- dunWithIt 3mo agoOh well ok I will get right on raising taxes. So simple I should have done it sooner. FairTax is regressive and does nothing to stop a trillionaire from launching dick rockets to nowhere. Each rocket and launch using more resources than a poor person will their entire life.
- cherrycherry98 3mo agoNot sure why the snarky response, obviously most people have very little direct influence over these things. So you oppose green tax policy on the grounds that it isn't punitive enough against rich people? A rich person living a miserly life would pay little in taxes, I see no problem with that. I assume that you are alluding to someone specific with the rocket launching trillionaire quip. That would be the same person who helped make electric vehicles viable and also helped develop reusable rockets, far greener than one time use ones, no?
- Alpha3031 3mo agoI don't think having rich people pay more taxes relative to their income should be considered punitive. Progressive taxation has a long history going back to the first modern income taxes in the 18th or 19th centuries on the basis that low income people have a more reduced capacity to pay (due to non-discretionary spending on necessities being a higher portion of income when it is lower) and I think it's reasonable to expect it out of taxes. Though, I do recognise that having one regressive tax wouldn't necessarily make the entire tax-and-transfers system regressive (or even more regressive, if that tax money is spent).
- dunWithIt 3mo ago
- florakel 3mo agoI totally agree with you that our unhinged consumption behavior is the core problem. And with AI we stepped on the accelerator again. But regarding your second statement. The actual problem is the greenhouse effect of CO2 and Methane in the atmosphere which traps the suns energy in our atmosphere heating up oceans, ice and landmass. The heat we produce is negligible compared to the energy the sun sends every day. The greenhouse gases are the problem. And you are right, pulling away that blanket so that more heat can dissipate into space will take a looong time (growing trees) or cost an insane amount of (clean) energy, reversing the chemical processes of burning oil, gas and coal.
- dunWithIt 3mo agoRight; I already covered that explaining the runtime energy use of tech is not the real issue. It's the endless production.
- gpt5 3mo agoBoth Europe and US's emissions are significantly (18%-30%) below their peak (which was 20 years ago. The rest of the world is also moving towards renewables.
- hn_throwaway_99 3mo agoHow much of that is just outsourcing much of our industry to Asia/etc.?
- enraged_camel 3mo agoYes, this is the right question to ask. A lot of the decrease in emissions in Western nations is the equivalent of dumping your trash in a lot across town. Sure it's "gone", but only in a technical sense.
- gpt5 3mo agoAsia is also moving towards renewables.
- tonyedgecombe 3mo agoNot as much as people would have you believe.
- karmakurtisaani 3mo agoWhat a terrible answer.
- tonyedgecombe 3mo agoUS imports represent approximately 14% of GDP, exports is about 11%. So net imports represents about 3% of GDP. Assuming emissions are roughly proportional to spending the US is exporting 3% of its emissions.
- hn_throwaway_99 3mo ago