Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 183 posts

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#131

Post by lazide »

vlz wrote: post #94
commandlinefan wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why this triggers such skepticism I know it does for me - because the people who claim to believe in it the most don't actually live their lives as if they actually believed it. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to do whatever I could reasonably do to create cooler summers and less smog, but I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

Considering that will just result in a lower quality of life for me, and everyone else not even noticing (and not moving the needle even a little globally) - why?

It’s like self flagellation in private. Maybe soul cleansing religiously or something, but utterly pointless in the real world.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#132

Post by midoridensha »

labster wrote: post #110
vlz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

It’s expensive to eat less meat. And I done mean in an abstract way about the time it takes to prepare meals, etc. On a per weight basis, chicken is half the price of peanut butter or cheese at the local grocery store. A whole cooked chicken is even cheaper at Costco. Not everyone can afford to eat less meat and replace it with plant protein.

Fair, but you can probably help save both money and the environment by cutting back on beef, and replacing it with chicken. Chicken is FAR more resource-efficient than beef. It's too bad they haven't figured out how to make it taste similar (of course, chicken doesn't taste bad, it's just really different, just like vanilla and chocolate ice cream taste different but one is not better than the other except in terms of personal preference).

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#133

Post by midoridensha »

vlz wrote: post #94
commandlinefan wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why this triggers such skepticism I know it does for me - because the people who claim to believe in it the most don't actually live their lives as if they actually believed it. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to do whatever I could reasonably do to create cooler summers and less smog, but I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

You completely left out the enormous impact that cars have. How about get rid of your car, move someplace walkable if you have to, and stop driving?

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#134

Post by yongjik »

commandlinefan wrote: post #45
dr_dshiv wrote: post #28

I don’t know why this triggers such skepticism in me. Particularly the section on novel entities. But it feels funny, somehow, and I can’t put my finger on it.

> why this triggers such skepticism I know it does for me - because the people who claim to believe in it the most don't actually live their lives as if they actually believed it. Don't get me wrong, I'd be happy to do whatever I could reasonably do to create cooler summers and less smog, but I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

> I've never heard any actual concrete proposal beyond "vote democrat".

Trump called the global warming a "Chinese hoax." If you're looking for leverages to influence the global climate as a US citizen, "vote democrat" is not a bad strategy. (Have to add: it's not because democrats are awesome, but because the alternative is horrible.)

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#135

Post by vlz »

twobitshifter wrote: post #97
vlz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

The flying thing is weird. It’s really that you emit a lot because you traveled so far. It’s more efficient that driving per mile and slightly less efficient than rail (not sure the type) https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2015/09/evolving-climate-... So it should be don’t travel so far and if you have to, take a train and if there’s no train, carpool, but fly rather than drive if you are traveling alone.

Thank you for the linked article! Yes that is an apt and necessary correction.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#136

Post by vlz »

midoridensha wrote: post #133
vlz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

You completely left out the enormous impact that cars have. How about get rid of your car, move someplace walkable if you have to, and stop driving?

You are right, that would certainly be a very big contribution and could have been listed as well. Relocating however is a very big step. While I actually don’t own a car myself and seldom needed one, I am hesitant to prescribe that to others as I know the situation outside the bigger cities gets unpleasant very fast when you are not mobile and relocating is a drastic step not available to everyone.

In the area of personal mobility, change away from cars could only result from collective action, e.g. drastic improvements to public transport and less from personal choice. (EVs however or hybrids are also a real option for many.)

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#137

Post by jacquesm »

Amezarak wrote: post #103
neltnerb wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I would like to have safe housing, healthcare, nutritious food, and clean water more than "driving and farming meat" but I guess we all have our priorities. I think that can definitely be sustainable indefinitely, but not so long as companies and cultures are unable to make any kind of real concessions to reality. We should not be using plastic. For basically anything. We should never have started. We should…

I was in full agreement with your comment until... > We should not be eating nearly as much meat as people do in rich countries. My peasant ancestors were eating meat every day 500 years ago. You can find different groups of people all over the world that are documented eating absurdly meat-heavy diets historically. Yes, at least some of us believe meat is very important for human flourishing. In strictly measurable…

Your peasant ancestors weren't with 8 billion. It doesn't scale.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#138

Post by jacquesm »

Amezarak wrote: post #111
fragmede wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry that saving the planet might cause minor inconvenience for you. There were far fewer factory farms and antibiotics 500 years ago, and 95% fewer people. What was sustainable then isn't sustainable now.

If the price is saving the planet is turning it into the dystopia we seem to be zooming towards full speed, I will be happy to not pay it and suffer the consequences of our civilization collapsing. I’m not changing my behavior and I will fight vigorously for it. If you stopped all meat production today it would not save you. (Post)industrial society itself is what is unsustainable. There is no way around that. There…

It's not a binary choice, it's a gradient and you decide to pick one of the extremes. Meat is a luxury, always has been for 'ordinary' people. One day per week if you were lucky until sixty to seventy years ago or so. The exception: farm owners and the wealthy.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#139

Post by jacquesm »

pixl97 wrote: post #54
Acssux wrote: post #5

How is something critical if it has been transgressed and we are still alive? Or on the very first moment every single one is past we all suddenly die?

If the engines on your plane fall off mid flight, everyone doesn't die instantly. They die instantly after 30 thousand feet of screaming terror. This comment screams lack of education about complicated systems. For example take overpopulation in things like grazing mammals. The funny thing about being overpopulated is that it is not instantly deadly. Once the mammals eat enough of their food source that their food so…

Even if not on an island extinction is on the menu depending on how large the population was to begin with and the velocity of the crash. This is because the males in the population can't reproduce by themselves and the weakest are often the young. So when food runs out, even if it is temporarily, you may see one last generation of very fit males and possibly some cannibalism and after that it is game over. Calhoun did some pretty gruesome (and borderline unethical) experiments that are the closest thing we have to lab controlled overpopulation experiments. The results presented are pretty sobering.

Re: Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries

#140

Post by vlz »

labster wrote: post #110
vlz wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I will bite. Concrete proposals for anybody regardless of political view: * Eat half the meat you do or less * Don‘t fly unless absolutely necessary * Get on a plan for renewable electrical energy if possible I know, far from everything in this topic is about consumer choices but a lot really is. If you don‘t want the nanny state to fix your problems you can start at your own doorstep.

It’s expensive to eat less meat. And I done mean in an abstract way about the time it takes to prepare meals, etc. On a per weight basis, chicken is half the price of peanut butter or cheese at the local grocery store. A whole cooked chicken is even cheaper at Costco. Not everyone can afford to eat less meat and replace it with plant protein.

True, but I would like to add:

1. If you can afford it, you should still reduce.

2. The meat and dairy industries are heavily subsidized especially in developed countries. These prices are artificially low.[1]

The subsidies could of course be shifted to human edible plants (instead of feeding corn/maize) making plant-based diets more affordable.

At the moment however few politician want to be connected to rising meat prices. If they were to get clear signals from their voters for shifting preferences of course that could also change.

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/14/global-f...

Post reply on HN