184
‘Hopeless and broken’: why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 08 May 2024
184 points (97.9% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5233 readers
565 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It boils down to political will to efficiently fund the transition. We can let planes fly - no simple solution to that. Put subsidies for green steel - currently costlier, not many companies will adopt too soon Build more public transport - fuck dem cars Enable remote work Invest in farmers to make the transition to electric tractors, then cut out gas subsidies
These are doable today, the funds should come easily if we don't let billionaires get away without paying taxes. Side note: 1 billion is a tremendous amount of money, but the top billionaires are worth 200 billions!!!
It's not just a matter of funding renewables. If there exists production of fossil fuels and these are allowed to be burnt, the current economic system is going to look for economic opportunities where it is possible to turn those fossil fuels into money - and it will find them, because energy is the foundation of all economic activity. In this way, the renewable transition is never-ending, because it will continue to try and fulfill an energy demand that is ever growing.
That is also true. In production perspective there's no sense to keep a small production quantity alive just for a limited application. Then we'll arrive at the conclusion that governments need to be able to regulate businesses with objective policies - not affected by industry lobbying. But that would need a very robust system of governance where the people cannot be bought out, ideally.
That's why in my view the key here is the policy - where to subsidize and not, where to tax and stop issuing permits, taking EOL pumps accountable etc.
I reckon, if we just simply made corporations pay the appropriate tax based on their climate destroying activities, we'd have enough to green the planet in literally a few years. There is trillions of dollars pouring into the pockets of industry that should be going to protect us.
It's just so bizzare that people seem to accept this as fine and normal. They're literally selling us the poison that we use to destroy ourselves, and not even paying taxes in most cases. It's a world wide problem and it's obscene.
I think your idea is a very fine idea but at the same time very naive.
One can start advocating what you did. Looking at classes like poor and rich, the poor are definitely the majority, so theoretically one should be able to plant the seed of thought.
But in praxis that doesn't necessarily work that way. I believe one will immediately be called 'too extreme' if not 'terrorist' and struggle to gain supporters. It doesn't help that much of the media is owned by few people.
At the same time the rich showed already that they have no intention to stop poisoning our life basis if that would mean less money for them.
So even if one gets people to follow the idea and starts to get political attention, rich corporations that have a threat to their income have also shown many times that it is not too difficult for them to make people disappear or that they 'tragically die' somehow.
I don't think it's particularly niave, if anything it's just pointing out the obvious solution. I'm not expecting it to change, clearly the ruling class will run this ship into the ground, if the 'people' were going to rise up and demand change it most likely would have happened already.
I just think it's an interesting reality that we're living in.
You are right. I kind of read your first comment like "Why don't we simply take matters in our hands" instead of "it's strange that many accept this exploitation of environment and even humans as perfectly normal".
It is interesting and depressing to look at. It's also fascinating to see how many people seem to be successfully brainwashed or whatever the reason is they vote against their own interest.