Green - An environmentalist community

The best lie from the fossil fuel industry is putting the burden of responsibility on the individual, and not the corporations.
The idea of a "carbon footprint" was created by the fossil fuel industry to convince people and governing bodies that individual people are the problem (and solution), and to distract from the pollution caused by industries.

There is so much completely unnecessary waste in industries that individuals couldn't possibly compete with. Most people aren't even aware of how much is wasted before the products even reach them.

The best way to fight climate change is to hold companies accountable.

@ajsadauskas
These are excuse trotted out by deniers in order to keep emitting and/ comes from entitlment. Not saying that's you bit thats essentially the sane arguments they use

As to the toast allegory, it's a nonsense argument because even then poorest Africans have emissions, a duck has emsisions, the debate needs to be around sustainable emsisions.

Apparently BP holds a gun to peoples heads and tells them not to vote Green, to fly to Bali for holidays and to buy a car and not cycle. It's not their fault Chevron hasn't invented a zero emsisions plane and zero emissions hovercraft.

You will AlWAYS have emsisions, the trick is we need get them to about 2-3t per annum (living like the average Cuban, not the average Australian) so do your bit to get your personal emisisons down to where they need to be AND vote Green to move the Overton Window and start allowing structural reform.

If it all sounds too hard just wait a few decades until Climate Changes destruction really hits home to even the developed world.

Everyone has to eat, no one has to fly or drive a car. Everyone can Vote Green (not to get them into power but to show all polticans it's time to take this seriously) and to allow the rise if the really radical politcans we need.

Voters don't, not becase of BP, Chevron or Shell but becase of greed, entitlement and apathy.

-----

>"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little." -Edmund Burke

@green

@ajsadauskas @green

Why not both?

Individuals need to change their expectations and consumption patterns, while the policy and infrastructure need to change in tandem.

You are not going to get radical reforms from the government without popular support from the population. That requires sacrifices and changes in societal norms.

In your toast example, the option that is available to everyone right now is to _not_ make the toast.

Just eat the damn bread.

You don't need a toast.

@ajsadauskas @green is it not worse than that?

There is more or less a 1:1 correlation between energy use and GDP.

We don’t have the time to build out the scale of renewable infrastructure that would replace our current energy use.

We need to use much less energy which means much smaller and therefore radically different economies

https://tickzero.com/film-3-techno-optimism/

@ajsadauskas @green I buy foods that have been produced as close as possible to my home. It's insane to buy milk from Queensland (3000 km away) when we have dairies here in Sth Australia.

Buying local often means buying what's in season locally and doing without for the rest of the year. This is also the cheapest way to buy fresh food.

While you're right that governments have the most power to make change, individuals can signal our willingness to make change without waiting for government.

#climateSurvival #climateAdaptation

@ajsadauskas @green Fossil fuel companies are terrified we'll work together to change what's socially acceptable—the rich will be shamed out of their yachts, EVs will be mainstream, local governments will outlaw housing gas hookups. They fight this propaganda & greenwashing (& "carbon footprint" rhetoric). The rich (people, countries) have a moral obligation to help the poor transition to a just, green economy... but we don't "wait around" for that to happen. We force it to happen by organizing.

@ajsadauskas @green So, let's talk about what it would take to get the farming, processing, and transport of foods and other goods, along with the energy used in a home to come from renewables.

In that way, the Carbon Footprint isn't such a bad way to think about it, the same tool intended to make individuals feel responsible can open our eyes to the kinds of change needed far beyond our individual reach.

Do we need to modernize and electrify domestic goods transit? I think it's probably a good idea (and honestly, I think self-driving long-haul electric freight is a great idea, along with a high speed electric freight and passenger rail network).

Do we need existing fossil fuel power generator sites to host energy storage facilities? (That's where most of the transmission wires traverse, much better than asking people to install batteries in their basements)?

Do we need a 'space race' style government & private push to design and build electrified farm equipment and smart irrigation systems, which we can ultimately tie to the Farm Bill to switch our food producers over to electrified farming?