| ▲ | thewhitetulip a day ago |
| Why is it that aggressive climate action is not taken still? |
|
| ▲ | water-data-dude a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| In the US it's been turned into a culture war thing, because ignoring the problem benefits some already wealthy people who think they'll either be insulated by their wealth or they'll dead before it's time to face the consequences |
| |
| ▲ | thewhitetulip 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | I remember when Texas had frozen they mocked global warming by saying it's gonna cool down the US. From that day to today's heat dome, things have changed a lot |
|
|
| ▲ | makapuf a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Sure those heatwaves are murderous, but I think the earlier they come, the earlier real action is taken. The worst could be a very slow response. |
| |
| ▲ | thewhitetulip a day ago | parent [-] | | They are early. I saw an old prediction for EU temparature The 2050 temp they had predicted was less than the current heat wave |
|
|
| ▲ | sometimelurker a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| coordination problems. everyone (mostpeople) wants action to be taken, but it requires coordination |
|
| ▲ | mike_hock a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Tragedy of the commons. |
|
| ▲ | inigyou a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What action would be taken by who? |
| |
| ▲ | adrianN 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The people here prepared a list: https://drawdown.org/ | |
| ▲ | IshKebab a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | There are literally hundreds of actions that could be (or in some cases have been) taken. I think the vast majority need to be taken by the government. Individuals mainly need to to support and demand these actions from the government, and punch climate change deniers in the face. E.g. 1. Stick to their plan to ban ICE car sales by 2030. 2. Unban on-shore wind power (Labour did this! Not that anyone noticed...) 3. Mandate solar panels and heat pumps for new houses. 4. Mandate bike lanes for new roads (blows my mind that this isn't a policy). 5. Take distribution into account when paying energy suppliers, so we aren't paying for a load of wind power in Scotland that we can't use (I believe this is being considered). 6. Upgrade the grid so we can get power from Scotland (I think this is in progress). 7. Make car charging infrastructure sane. No apps! Fines for broken chargers. More chargers along motorways. Street-side charging. 8. Stop freezing fuel duty. 9. Mandate OpenTherm (or similar) on boilers and thermostats. 10. Create an open, mandatory standard for remote adjustment of power consumption of things like air conditioners, freezers, car chargers and so on, that must be supported and can be used by power companies to optimise grid usage. Some large buildings do this but 99.99% of things that could do it don't. 11. Offer government backed loans for solar power. There are private companies that do it but they're seen as quite sketchy (e.g. if you sell your house...) so uptake is low. 12. Give office employees a right to work from home one day a week where it's possible (similar to how you have a right to change your hours). 13. Ban patio heaters. 14. Ban especially inefficient cars (e.g. less than 20 mpg). 15. Fix the railways... They are working on this tbf. | | |
| ▲ | inigyou a day ago | parent [-] | | Then I think the answer to your question is that the government is corrupt and paid off by oil companies and other interests to not do these things. So they will not happen. | | |
| ▲ | IshKebab a day ago | parent [-] | | Wasn't my question, but no I don't think that's the reason. It's that ordinary people do not actually care about it that much. Plenty of people are still climate change deniers (yes even in the middle of an unprecedented heatwave in the UK which is relatively liberal). Even the people that have brains are ostensibly do care about climate change... when push comes to shove and you try to increase petrol prices to the level that represents their true cost, or try to erect a wind turbine near them... They'll say "erm actually never mind". Actually it doesn't even need to be a wind turbine. There are many PV solar projects in the UK that get attacked by NIMBYs. Literally just solar panels in fields. The most low impact construction ever. How could people possibly object to that, you ask? There are a variety of bullshit reasons they come up with e.g. 1. Extra lorry traffic during construction (a one-time minor inconvenience). 2. The applicants hadn't done a survey on how putting poles in the ground in the middle of a field might affect the habitats of newts, or some bollocks like that. 3. There's too much solar power already. I shit you not. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cd0vyv7rejlo |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | titzer a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because rich people want more money. They keep saying it's for the good of humanity and some useful idiots keep repeating that. A more balanced tax policy, regulation of financial markets, incentives to renewals, stopping investment in fossil fuels, increasing energy efficiency, and rewilding could all help, but we won't do a lick of it, because every single one of those things goes against the billionaires who own the political class. |
| |
| ▲ | argentinian a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Voters also don't care much. You might say that rich people and politicians have more responsibility because they have more power for making changes, but politicians are chosen by voters, and wealth doesn't make people more ethical | | |
| ▲ | thewhitetulip a day ago | parent [-] | | So I've thought about this a lot. All the news orgs are owned by oligarchs and that's why even on this thread using green energy is equal to going back to stone age When China India and now Phillipines and rest of South Asia is installing record number of solar and wind | | |
| ▲ | argentinian a day ago | parent [-] | | What do you think about the concept of "externalities", making producers of excessive contaminating gases pay for it because they are harming the planet? | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | makapuf a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'm 100% behind it, but would regulation of financial markets and balanced tax policy do for global warming ? Sure heavy regulation of industries and fossil fuels usage but financial markets, im not sure. | | |
| ▲ | inigyou a day ago | parent [-] | | Financial markets are the reason nobody has top-down control, because the market has control. I don't remember where I read that where employees in companies think AI is stupid but their manager wants them to, the manager also thinks AI is stupid but the CEO wants them to, the CEO also thinks AI is stupid but the board wants them to, the board thinks AI is stupid but investors want them to, and when they interview some investors, they don't give a shit about AI, why would they. Nobody is steering the ship. It's just drifting aimlessly in random self-perpetuating cycles. That's because financial markets are steering the ship but they don have any brains. If we put humans in charge of the ship again, we might be able to actually steer it and then we could steer it away from the iceberg that is climate change before we hit that iceberg. | | |
| ▲ | argentinian a day ago | parent [-] | | What would you suggest that humans could do to steer it away from climate change? | | |
| ▲ | inigyou a day ago | parent [-] | | Stop burning fossil fuels? It's pretty easy actually, if you were god-emperor of the world you could structure it in a way where very few fossil fuels have to be burnt. But nobody is god-emperor of the world, nobody is even god-emperor of most countries or even most large companies, people are barely president of most countries or large companies and that's the problem. | | |
| ▲ | argentinian a day ago | parent [-] | | So we need a benign world emperor. And there's the risk of an evil world emperor. | | |
| ▲ | inigyou a day ago | parent [-] | | We could start by letting companies have emperors, instead of letting the financial market be the emperor of almost every company. How's Valve Software doing? | | |
| ▲ | argentinian a day ago | parent [-] | | The financial market is an expression of the incentives of investors. I think that markets are not the problem, instead the problem is that pollution is free, companies and governments can pollute or Earth without paying externalities. Blaming markets is completely missing the mark. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | throw_m239339 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Why is it that aggressive climate action is not taken still? We can't even have global peace around the world, some people are still starving daily despite the fact that there is plenty of food to feed everybody on the planet, and slavery is still a thing, who's going to do what climate action exactly? |
| |
| ▲ | thewhitetulip a day ago | parent [-] | | Europe and the world in general obviously. 1000 people doed in France due to the heat wave. Ignoring heat wave deaths, Hormuz crisis has shown us that oil cam be blockaded but the panels and windmills installed on our rooftops can't be blockaded Even Cuba is setting up solar plants with the help of China. Philippines is the highest importer of solar panels since Hormuz was blocked. Rest of South Asia is quickly following | | |
| ▲ | throw_m239339 a day ago | parent [-] | | > Europe and the world in general obviously. 1000 people doed in France due to the heat wave. Way more died during the heat wave in France in 2003. What did France do? Nothing substantial, because nobody is willing to bear the cost of substantial policies to fight climate change. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | bamboozled 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Because it's fun to "own the libs" |
|
| ▲ | dismalaf a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Do you really think Russia, China, India or developing countries are going to stop using fossil fuels if we stop? If the west de-industrializes then our enemies will destroy us... Russia's literally invading Europe right now (albeit poorly). |
| |
| ▲ | feydaykyn a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Check current renewal deployment figures, China is actually at the forefront, and India is taking the "right" path. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1MGJUaxQPk | | |
| ▲ | dismalaf a day ago | parent [-] | | Both are still increasing their total fossil fuel usage significantly. Even if they're deploying renewables at a high rate. Both are also increasing coal usage. Total and cumulative numbers are all that matter for global warming. https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/coal-production-by-countr... | | |
| ▲ | feydaykyn a day ago | parent [-] | | Thank you for the source, it's very interesting. I am a bit lost though: the first global graphic shows a depressing increase of fossil fuel consumption, but the detailed graphics after either show a stagnation or a decrease (must be centered on electricity generation I guess). The global picture seems very positive, reaching a plateau is a great achievement! Let's meet in 2026 to hopefully confirm this trend |
|
| |
| ▲ | Hikikomori a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yeah they will, its literally cheaper now. | |
| ▲ | thewhitetulip a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | China and India are installing crazy amounts of solar. I don't know much about Russia. India is doing industrialisation via solar. Massive solar arrays on top of factories and warehouses. How the heck is installing solar panels to generate green electricity de-industrilaize?! Also India is building worlds largest solar park of 30GW |
|