Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says • Hacker News Board

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#81

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:44 PM UTC

komaromy wrote: post #55

TeMPOraL wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could perhaps 3 or 4 decades ago have made a collective decision to gradually reduce consumption and allow our home to survive in decent enough shape to sustain us. One thing we know about humans is that, as a species, we were never and are not currently capable of making such collective decisions or otherwise coordinating at this scale. This is probably the root of most problems we have, except death and diseas…

Collective action has worked in the past. We did it with CFCs.

Sort of, mostly. It's an interesting case you bring up, and I think it may be informative about the conditions under which global-scale coordination happens. Note here though, that "collective action" meant government regulating CFCs out of use, and not a bottom-up people movement.

I need to study the details of this case more; from the little knowledge I have on it, the cynic in me would conclude that it only worked as effectively as it did because by the time of the Montreal Protocol, DuPont had figured out and patented a replacement for CFCs.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#82

Post by stOneskull » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:46 PM UTC

sc4les wrote: post #74

Udik wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sustainable farming needs to be local, it needs natural fertilizers and it needs grazing animals. I suspect that the "sustainable farming" you're describing, if applied at scale (= enough to feed 7 billion people) would require so much land as to completely devastate and replace every natural environment still left on earth. Little crops and pastures, as pleasing as they are to the eye, are not a natural environmen…

Yeah, this sounds like typical carnist propaganda. Meat has some magical ingredient needed for health that no one can name? Almost all peer-reviewed studies show that vegans (diet done properly) are the only group within healthy range for almost all markers; most meat eaters are deficient in B12 etc etc. It is strikingly similar to smoking: educating the public takes a very long time, laws are always behind and good…

Like with most things, it depends. Something jumps in and shakes up the simplicity Sometimes it's an eskimo getting his vitamin C from animal organs.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#83

Post by _Microft » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:46 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #56

perfunctory wrote: post #11

We keep hearing that individual actions don't matter and that we need a system change instead. I used to hold the same opinion for the very long time. However, since recently I started to turn around. For the last 30 years governments and politicians have proven incapable to do anything about global heating. What makes us think it will be any different in the coming years. Scientists keep producing report after repor…

> “ Reduce your meat consumption as much as you can. Don't go all the way vegan, but make meat a special treat not a commodity. ” No thank you. I know vegans have an anti-meat agenda and have been promoting this idea, however industrial agriculture as a whole is not sustainable, not just meat, and switching to a plants-based diet won’t save the planet. The elephant in the room is that sustainable farming needs to be…

That was a pretty incoherent rant, so not sure where to start.

Meat, especially beef production produces an order of magnitude more emissions than crops do. Rice is quite bad among the crops because of the methane produced but even that is far better than meat. [0]

You can even cut 80% of CO_2 equiv. emissions of beef by replacing it with pork. It's THAT bad.

Half of all people depend on crops produced with artifical fertilizer, so there's no way around that at the moment. But: you could reduce a lot of the production of crops if you hadn't to feed that many cows for meat for dairy products.

I'm not a vegan or vegetarian by the way but have reduced my meat consumption by at least 50-75% without actually missing anything. Don't go into the sacrifice area, nobody likes to be there. Just cut what you won't miss anyways.

[0] https://ourworldindata.org/meat-and-seafood-production-consu...

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#84

Post by MiroF » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:47 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #52

bryanlarsen wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe this is an incredibly dangerous attitude. Kudos that you're doing your part, and leading by example is important. However, systemic change is possible. We have numerous counter-examples: the UN, the Montreal protocol, free trade deals, et cetera. So why don't we have systemic change for climate change, because people like you and I let our politicians get away with it! If it was obvious to politicians that…

The next U.S. federal election is an excellent opportunity to address climate change. Ensure that the Democratic primary chooses a leader with a good plan, and then ensure that he/she wins in 2020.

I'm not confident any of the Democratic candidates have a good plan and even if they do, voters would not support it.

Even with mild assumptions about a duty to not harm future generations (say if we substantially discount the livelihood of our children and their children in favor of our own), we would need to take action that dramatically reduces our emissions.

American voters will not vote for anything even remotely of that magnitude. Most Americans would be unwilling to see their electrical bills rise $10 if it meant averting climate change.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#85

Post by code_duck » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:49 PM UTC

bad_user wrote: post #56

perfunctory wrote: post #11

We keep hearing that individual actions don't matter and that we need a system change instead. I used to hold the same opinion for the very long time. However, since recently I started to turn around. For the last 30 years governments and politicians have proven incapable to do anything about global heating. What makes us think it will be any different in the coming years. Scientists keep producing report after repor…

> “ Reduce your meat consumption as much as you can. Don't go all the way vegan, but make meat a special treat not a commodity. ” No thank you. I know vegans have an anti-meat agenda and have been promoting this idea, however industrial agriculture as a whole is not sustainable, not just meat, and switching to a plants-based diet won’t save the planet. The elephant in the room is that sustainable farming needs to be…

It doesn’t make sense that vegans would be short on protein give that there are copious sources of vegetable protein such as beans. B12 is an issue, but you could also make a list of vitamins that an average person doesn’t get in their diet because they eat fast food and ramen.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#86

Post by navigatesol » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:50 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #72

bad_user wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “ Reduce your meat consumption as much as you can. Don't go all the way vegan, but make meat a special treat not a commodity. ” No thank you. I know vegans have an anti-meat agenda and have been promoting this idea, however industrial agriculture as a whole is not sustainable, not just meat, and switching to a plants-based diet won’t save the planet. The elephant in the room is that sustainable farming needs to be…

What a bunch of bullshit. I'm not a vegan, even though I'm sure you'll label me as having an "anti-meat agenda." I have substantially cut down on my own meat consumption due to the environmental impact. > industrial agriculture as a whole is not sustainable, not just meat, and switching to a plants-based diet won’t save the planet. Just because two things both cause emissions doesn't mean one isn't much, much worse t…

>What a bunch of bullshit. I'm not a vegan, even though I'm sure you'll label me as having an "anti-meat agenda." I have substantially cut down on my own meat consumption due to the environmental impact.

Do you fly less? Drive less or carpool? Recycle? Live in a small home? Did you decide to not to have children? Wear only used clothing? Do you track your trash and food waste? Do you eat less? Shower less? Do you donate money to environmental causes?

The militant "your opinion is bullshit" on individual issues is precisely why the majority of people don't take climate change seriously. I'll continue to enjoy my meat and do my part in many other ways, thanks.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#87

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #59

bryanlarsen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next U.S. federal election is an excellent opportunity to address climate change. Ensure that the Democratic primary chooses a leader with a good plan, and then ensure that he/she wins in 2020.

Except it's also not. As a continent, Asia is the largest polluter by far. What's worst, they're exporting those practices to Africa. Meanwhile, the Anglo-West is hyper-focused on the US because there's a president they don't like. This has been a blessing (now the average Anglo-Westerner at least pretends to care about the environment), but also a curse (they think the US is the only country that can save humanity).

> Except it's also not. As a continent, Asia is the largest polluter by far.

That doesn't mean that US policy can't address the problem; US policy—on climate as well as most other things—need not be limited to domestic policy.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#88

Post by zajd » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #59

bryanlarsen wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The next U.S. federal election is an excellent opportunity to address climate change. Ensure that the Democratic primary chooses a leader with a good plan, and then ensure that he/she wins in 2020.

Except it's also not. As a continent, Asia is the largest polluter by far. What's worst, they're exporting those practices to Africa. Meanwhile, the Anglo-West is hyper-focused on the US because there's a president they don't like. This has been a blessing (now the average Anglo-Westerner at least pretends to care about the environment), but also a curse (they think the US is the only country that can save humanity).

https://wriorg.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/uploads/cumulati...

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#89

Post by TeMPOraL » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:51 PM UTC

gxx wrote: post #67

TeMPOraL wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We could perhaps 3 or 4 decades ago have made a collective decision to gradually reduce consumption and allow our home to survive in decent enough shape to sustain us. One thing we know about humans is that, as a species, we were never and are not currently capable of making such collective decisions or otherwise coordinating at this scale. This is probably the root of most problems we have, except death and diseas…

For this reason there is no hope that collective action through government pave the way to the solutions we need. Governments will only be forced to act when things are so bad that it's too late. There is also no hope that individual action will make a meaningful difference. Not enough people will care until things are so bad it's too late. Public corporations will not lead the way to a solution because they are only…

> there is no hope that collective action through government pave the way to the solutions we need

I sort of disagree; the governments might be (as usual) the crucial element of the solution - they're the only actors on this planet capable of forcing a decision on masses, even if it goes against the wishes of the market. But getting the government to do the right thing sooner rather than later - that's the hard part. Especially that nations are market players themselves, and doing the right thing in case of climate change means handicapping the whole country on the international market.

I think both the ultra rich and governments can be useful in funding more R&D on clean technologies. The goal here should be developing technologies that ultimately let you go carbon-neutral while sacrificing as little as possible compared to the old methods. Doing the right thing is painful for people, and by extension the governments, so whatever can be done to ease that pain increases the chance that the right things will start being done.

Re: Up to one million species are on the verge of extinction, U.N. panel says

#90

Post by MiroF » Mon, May 06, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

uhtred wrote: post #64

perfunctory wrote: post #11

We keep hearing that individual actions don't matter and that we need a system change instead. I used to hold the same opinion for the very long time. However, since recently I started to turn around. For the last 30 years governments and politicians have proven incapable to do anything about global heating. What makes us think it will be any different in the coming years. Scientists keep producing report after repor…

Why not go vegan? Sure, anything is better than nothing, but a vegan diet is best of all. Plus, dairy, especially when consumed as cheese, is worse than some meat in terms of environmental impact.

Personally I think that we need to change what it means to be standard vegetarian - add fish, remove dairy. Better for the environment and perhaps easier for people to switch to!

Currently, I have to go around calling myself a "lacto-pescatarian" which is far too much of a mouthful