3 ms·

I don't want to criticize you, but a question: what are you doing in practice to change something? Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? Let's lo

I don't want to criticize you, but a question: what are you doing in practice to change something? Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? Let's look at me: I don't own a car, live in a smaller town, move around mostly on foot, take public transportation, long distance mostly train. I have two kids and for years my electricity total was 1500kwh a year. Last year it was 1100kwh (heating is gas though, that's what my building has). All this and I do cook a lot with an electric stove. I bought some new appliances before the old ones were completely broken (although they were close) partly because the new ones were all very energy efficient. But: I live abroad and take my kids to my parents once a year, and fly. Last year I flew four times, including intercontinental (albeit a true outlier of a year). I consume things produced all around the globe, either as items like phones, or food, and the food I do probably daily (I really like fruit, so bananas, mangos, avocados etc). My point is: my carbon footprint is pretty low, and I try to be mindful about not wasting resources. And it's not that hard, I don't feel like I am missing out on something if I don't drive a car. But I still took my kids to Spain on a vacation, and we still flew there to sit on the beach. Giving that up is hard, and making them sacrifice their childhood fun is hard. There's a range of what people are ready to give up. I would say I'm on the better side of it, but it's still not enough. Almost no one is ready to sacrifice, and we need almost everyone to sacrifice. Governments do lip service to these goals, but let's see how much countries like Spain sre ready to curb tourism, or countries like Germany and China that live off manufacturing to cut consumption. Who will give up their job to reduce carbon emissions? The saying train wreck in slow motion has merit.

keybored 1mo ago
> Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? What a waste of time this is. Carbon footprint? Zero-emission homes? The climate is global and the balance sheet is spread across all of us. Someone with a disability might have much more use for cars and transporation than someone who is able-bodied. And homes out in the boonies without much sun (for solar power) might need a diesel generator for their three-times-a-year power outages in order to keep up productivity and a comfortable existence. And twenty miles from that house is a village full of grid-connected homes running on hydropower. As long as the “balance sheet” is okay we should not fret about this individual stuff. “Carbon footprint” was explicitly designed as a distraction away from British Petroleum and onto the consumer. I think the kids call that a “whataboutism”. > I consume things produced all around the globe, either as items like phones, or food, and the food I do probably daily (I really like fruit, so bananas, mangos, avocados etc). Yeah things are made in Vietnam and China now. And that is the consumer’s fault? That eco-friendly wooden utensils used in Europe are made in China? Step one. Create and design a deeply interconnected, global market with specializations. The signal is just money, the most fungible asset. Step two: externalities. Step three: use money (see step one) to market your scapegoating to everybody, in direct contradiction with the sheer simplicity of step one; no, consumers aren’t supposed to just use money/price as the signal, that’s evil and has a high Carbon Footprint. > My point is: my carbon footprint is pretty low, and I try to be mindful about not wasting resources. And it's not that hard, I don't feel like I am missing out on something if I don't drive a car. But I still took my kids to Spain on a vacation, and we still flew there to sit on the beach. Giving that up is hard, and making them sacrifice their childhood fun is hard. I dunno, an extra twelve degrees Celsius and beaches is worth those flights? And sacrificing childhood fun? Children are an endless maw of desires. Of course if you give them the idea of something (or the TV does) and then don’t go through with it is the greatest crime in the history of humanity. And yet, our parents went without all of that, etc., despite their identical child programming.
- aqfamnzc 1mo ago
  I don't think GP is trying to say they're so much better than the rest. Their point is that the majority of earth-dwellers, including their own relatively climate-conscious lifestyle, are not (and are not willing to) do nearly enough to meaningfully affect the situation.
  - keybored 1mo ago
    Read the snark. Individual eco merit is a waste of time and a distraction. Climate change was caused by an industrial and globe-spanning effort. People BIKING to work and NOT flying aeroplanes will not even make a dent. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790
- locallost 1mo ago
  Honestly the only thing I see here that is a waste of time is trying to communicate with people that don't read and stick to canned tired responses they iterate on like an LLM. I was replying to a very specific comment that said paraphrasing "I don't get how people can choose to ignore it". The point of what I wrote was, to an extent almost everyone ignores it, even I do, and I asked what is it that you actually DO that makes a difference. Because I don't know a single person that makes a total commitment to fixing this problem. Discussing who's fault is it is for useless people. Solutions aren't done by assigning blame so you can continue on with your day. The world can likely not survive people in every corner of the world eating food grown in some other corner of the world. The "balance sheet" is clearly not okay. Now continue having fun proposing simplistic snap your fingers it's done solutions to the hardest problem humanity has ever faced, right at the intersection of basic human psychology, needs and desires to lead a comfortable life, and an economic system that by definition doesn't see further than its own nose. So step one is actually: people do ignore it and this is not going to change. How do we fix the issue with this constraint in mind?
  - keybored 1mo ago
    This is my fault for not highlighting the crux of the issue.[1] That was only sarcastically pointed at in my “Step one.” paragraph. Okay, so I guess “blame” is too contentious. It is of course technically true that we can all bike more, or we can stop the petroleum industry, and both have a positive effect, but the Petroleum Industry is not here in this thread so biking is the real thing to discuss. But let’s not say that I blame the Petroleum Industry or whatever else. Let’s call it: Properly seeing cause and effect, if you prefer. Properly seeing cause and effect is actually the proper way to solve any problem. You should root out weeds rather than trimming them. We can see the symptoms of mystification (cf. considering real cause and effect) with terms like “basic human psychology”. I don’t think, ever, that the basic human psychology and “needs and desires to lead a comfortable life” for the average person has ever mattered in a real crisis. In a real crisis like a war you use rationing and other harsh measures to deal with the problem. The powers that be don’t fret that Johnny is on keto and needs his daily butter. But we are not in a crisis according to this irrational system which would rather burn the world down than to upend... the system itself. Of course you dismiss my remedy as wishful thinking and make-believe because that is the real, challenging task ahead of us. Merely to stop companies and other entities that have the whole economic system, militaries for that matter, etc. behind them. Not just wishing and praying that the consumers will drive less and for China to give up their jerbs to produce less commodities. > > I don't want to criticize you, but a question: what are you doing in practice to change something? Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? Oh if we just prodded each other. A little, day by day. Have you heeded the call of British Petroleum? [1] Which is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790
ColdStream 1mo ago
> My point is: my carbon footprint is pretty low, and I try to be mindful about not wasting resources. While it might be low by western standards, it is probably still very high by global averages. For instance it is estimated that roughly 80% of people have never flowing in a plane, and that 10% of the remaining have never flown more than once. Flown 4 times last year puts you right near the top. This isn't saying "You are a terrible person!", it is saying that we all have a habit of normalizing the world around us even if it is wildy unsustainable. And even then, the planet doesn't care about were you sit in terms of other people, it just cares about your impacts. Statistically, the homeless in my country (Australia) have a carbon foot print 3 times greater than the average African. What looks horrible here, resource wise, is far ahead of many in this world.
- locallost 1mo ago
  That was exactly my point.

keybored 1mo ago

> Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? What a waste of time this is. Carbon footprint? Zero-emission homes? The climate is global and the balance sheet is spread across all of us. Someone with a disability might have much more use for cars and transporation than someone who is able-bodied. And homes out in the boonies without much sun (for solar power) might need a diesel generator for their three-times-a-year power outages in order to keep up productivity and a comfortable existence. And twenty miles from that house is a village full of grid-connected homes running on hydropower. As long as the “balance sheet” is okay we should not fret about this individual stuff. “Carbon footprint” was explicitly designed as a distraction away from British Petroleum and onto the consumer. I think the kids call that a “whataboutism”. > I consume things produced all around the globe, either as items like phones, or food, and the food I do probably daily (I really like fruit, so bananas, mangos, avocados etc). Yeah things are made in Vietnam and China now. And that is the consumer’s fault? That eco-friendly wooden utensils used in Europe are made in China? Step one. Create and design a deeply interconnected, global market with specializations. The signal is just money, the most fungible asset. Step two: externalities. Step three: use money (see step one) to market your scapegoating to everybody, in direct contradiction with the sheer simplicity of step one; no, consumers aren’t supposed to just use money/price as the signal, that’s evil and has a high Carbon Footprint. > My point is: my carbon footprint is pretty low, and I try to be mindful about not wasting resources. And it's not that hard, I don't feel like I am missing out on something if I don't drive a car. But I still took my kids to Spain on a vacation, and we still flew there to sit on the beach. Giving that up is hard, and making them sacrifice their childhood fun is hard. I dunno, an extra twelve degrees Celsius and beaches is worth those flights? And sacrificing childhood fun? Children are an endless maw of desires. Of course if you give them the idea of something (or the TV does) and then don’t go through with it is the greatest crime in the history of humanity. And yet, our parents went without all of that, etc., despite their identical child programming.

aqfamnzc 1mo ago
I don't think GP is trying to say they're so much better than the rest. Their point is that the majority of earth-dwellers, including their own relatively climate-conscious lifestyle, are not (and are not willing to) do nearly enough to meaningfully affect the situation.
- keybored 1mo ago
  Read the snark. Individual eco merit is a waste of time and a distraction. Climate change was caused by an industrial and globe-spanning effort. People BIKING to work and NOT flying aeroplanes will not even make a dent. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790
locallost 1mo ago
Honestly the only thing I see here that is a waste of time is trying to communicate with people that don't read and stick to canned tired responses they iterate on like an LLM. I was replying to a very specific comment that said paraphrasing "I don't get how people can choose to ignore it". The point of what I wrote was, to an extent almost everyone ignores it, even I do, and I asked what is it that you actually DO that makes a difference. Because I don't know a single person that makes a total commitment to fixing this problem. Discussing who's fault is it is for useless people. Solutions aren't done by assigning blame so you can continue on with your day. The world can likely not survive people in every corner of the world eating food grown in some other corner of the world. The "balance sheet" is clearly not okay. Now continue having fun proposing simplistic snap your fingers it's done solutions to the hardest problem humanity has ever faced, right at the intersection of basic human psychology, needs and desires to lead a comfortable life, and an economic system that by definition doesn't see further than its own nose. So step one is actually: people do ignore it and this is not going to change. How do we fix the issue with this constraint in mind?
- keybored 1mo ago
  This is my fault for not highlighting the crux of the issue.[1] That was only sarcastically pointed at in my “Step one.” paragraph. Okay, so I guess “blame” is too contentious. It is of course technically true that we can all bike more, or we can stop the petroleum industry, and both have a positive effect, but the Petroleum Industry is not here in this thread so biking is the real thing to discuss. But let’s not say that I blame the Petroleum Industry or whatever else. Let’s call it: Properly seeing cause and effect, if you prefer. Properly seeing cause and effect is actually the proper way to solve any problem. You should root out weeds rather than trimming them. We can see the symptoms of mystification (cf. considering real cause and effect) with terms like “basic human psychology”. I don’t think, ever, that the basic human psychology and “needs and desires to lead a comfortable life” for the average person has ever mattered in a real crisis. In a real crisis like a war you use rationing and other harsh measures to deal with the problem. The powers that be don’t fret that Johnny is on keto and needs his daily butter. But we are not in a crisis according to this irrational system which would rather burn the world down than to upend... the system itself. Of course you dismiss my remedy as wishful thinking and make-believe because that is the real, challenging task ahead of us. Merely to stop companies and other entities that have the whole economic system, militaries for that matter, etc. behind them. Not just wishing and praying that the consumers will drive less and for China to give up their jerbs to produce less commodities. > > I don't want to criticize you, but a question: what are you doing in practice to change something? Is your carbon footprint below what is sustainable? Oh if we just prodded each other. A little, day by day. Have you heeded the call of British Petroleum? [1] Which is https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49425790

ColdStream 1mo ago

> My point is: my carbon footprint is pretty low, and I try to be mindful about not wasting resources. While it might be low by western standards, it is probably still very high by global averages. For instance it is estimated that roughly 80% of people have never flowing in a plane, and that 10% of the remaining have never flown more than once. Flown 4 times last year puts you right near the top. This isn't saying "You are a terrible person!", it is saying that we all have a habit of normalizing the world around us even if it is wildy unsustainable. And even then, the planet doesn't care about were you sit in terms of other people, it just cares about your impacts. Statistically, the homeless in my country (Australia) have a carbon foot print 3 times greater than the average African. What looks horrible here, resource wise, is far ahead of many in this world.

locallost 1mo ago
That was exactly my point.