It's rather easy to say we don't have a plan after decades of inaction.

It's been obvious we're trying to commit mass suicide for a long time now.

No, the people who made it so that there was no way for humans to enjoy those reasonable comforts without contributing to pollution.

> Are you posting these comments from a computer powered by solar panels?

That's precisely the point. It shouldn't be individual responsibility to improve our infrastructure (though, in point of fact, I actually _am_ posting using solar power). A good society is one in which everyone _is_ using solar power _without realizing it_, because those responsible for providing power to society do so responsibly.

Once the hidden research was revealed to the public, we all started curbing our carbon emissions, right?

The research wasn't entirely hidden as they did not have a monopoly on it.

In the 1980s, as a child, I remember learning at school about the greenhouse effect, or whatever we called it then. It was not difficult to understand, and neither was the 'nuclear umbrella' that we also had to contend with.

In the mid 1990s I was working in TV weather. We self-censored ourselves regarding global warming, or whatever we called it then. None of us were paid by big oil.

The euphemisms for 'climate change' tell their own story, it seems we need to downgrade the wording for the inevitable catastrophe every decade or so, I think we are on 'climate emergency' now.

As a result of what I learned in school, I genuinely adopted a low-carbon lifestyle which was quite hard to do when everyone was going the other way. If you step inside a car (when you have chosen to not own one) then you are deemed a hypocrite. If you don't eat those cows that create so much methane then you will be called a hypocrite for owning a leather belt. If you read a book then you will be called a hypocrite since trees had to be pulped. Be green and those stuck in the past will get all passive aggressive on you even if you aren't preaching to others.

When all is done we could collectively blame the oil companies for obfuscating the evidence of climate change. Similarly, when all is done with the current genocides going on, we can blame the politicians or the media for not letting us know the truth. Yet we are all a few clicks away from seeing how our alleged enemies 'report our crimes'. Yet, consciously or unconsciously, we censor ourselves.

An interesting thing that happens here is also the conflation of company and country. You mention the oil companies blocking and obscuring the research, but GP was putting the blame on the shoulders of the "oil countries." Something to be aware of with the rise of weaponised xenophobia and general background islamophobia.

Yes, the people are to blame. The only way this changes is if governments that believe it is an issue to be fixed are elected and actually work to attempt to fix the problem. Do you get the sense that such governments are gaining ground politically anywhere in the first world?

I'm sorry you feel so powerless about these things. I hope you find a way to take control in ways that matter to you.

Personally, I've largely replaced my car usage with walking and biking, installed insulation in uninsulated parts of my home, got more comfortable with less heating/cooling (sweaters and fans), and am planning to upgrade to a heat pump when the time comes.

It's good to live your values without falling into scrupulosity, both for yourself and others.

Why hydrogen? It has an extremely potent greenhouse effect and is obviously the leakiest of gases - the leakage alone could make it more environmentally damaging than actually burning natural gas.

And have you seen how hydrogen burns or how easy it is to trigger an explosion? I wouldn’t live anywhere near a “jerry rigged” hydrogen storage facility.

Sounds like real-life Factorio.

Instead of blaming oil users, you think the producers should restrict the supply to them, forcing them to reduce or stop their use? But you just said they cannot make ends meet - will they die if they can't afford or aren't allowed oil? How can oil producers do anything at all about climate change besides producing less oil?

I wonder what Sweden was doing differently

> Take for example this distribution of age at death in Sweden in 1900. You will see, that in 1900, life expectancy was 52 years. However, the median age at death (the age above and below 50% of the population die respectively) is 63 years. Although the life expectancy is only 52 years, an individual has thus a chance of 50% to live past 63 years. Thus, if you went across a Swedish graveyard from 1900 (I'm not sure if the data relates to people born in 1900, or mortality data from 1900, but this is not the point of my comment), you would see that more than half reached an age past 60 years. (https://old.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/zzy2bh/no_avera...)

This is right. The discovery of antibiotics and many other medical advances somehow influenced this, too, though.

All of England is pretty close to the sea though. But you'd need to build a separate set of pipes to carry all the salt water.