81–90 of 111 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Africa can skip a lot of our mistakes. PV is cheap, and for places that don't yet have a reliable grid connection, batteries may be cheaper than building a grid (or stabilising it if they have one that's unstable).
Yup, the same way they skipped landline phones and started with smartphones right away.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any tax in America would be completely pointless if there's nothing that limits, China, and India, as the world's largest polluters. Anything the West does is just a drop in the bucket, unless those two countries follow.
It's a very large drop. 33% of global carbon emissions are from the west 18% from the united states A significant share of chinese emmissions is driven by western consumerism as well and could be reduced. Even a 10% reduction of the overall share driven purely by the west would amount to a lot more than a drop. Even more if coupled with a proper incentive system for other countries to follow "completely pointless"?
There's a reason semiconductors are no longer manufactured in 'Silicon Valley' who's soil is still full of forever chemicals, but mostly all moved to Asia where there's a lot less concern for the local environment as long as billions are flowing in the country.
https://theconversation.com/how-silicon-valley-industry-poll...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup, the same way they skipped landline phones and started with smartphones right away.
They probably won't skip ICE car ownership and dirty industry revolving around mining and manufacturing cheap stuff for the 'green' west.
But if the west would be serious about climate change and developement aid, there would be huge opportunities to do things different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any tax in America would be completely pointless if there's nothing that limits, China, and India, as the world's largest polluters. Anything the West does is just a drop in the bucket, unless those two countries follow.
It's a very large drop. 33% of global carbon emissions are from the west 18% from the united states A significant share of chinese emmissions is driven by western consumerism as well and could be reduced. Even a 10% reduction of the overall share driven purely by the west would amount to a lot more than a drop. Even more if coupled with a proper incentive system for other countries to follow "completely pointless"?
Welp. Time for a conference we all fly to using private jets to tell the plebs how it's their doing that's destroying the planet. Maybe agree on a tax or something that screws over the little guy while having absolutely no effect on the global climate.
Do you have a source to support your claim that a carbon tax, which is generally seen as an efficient way to reduce carbon emissions, would have no effect on the global climate and screw over the little guy? I ask as a renter who doesn't own a car and would love to stop paying for other people's fancy electric SUV's and house retrofits that costs tens of thousands of Euro.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Large cities couldn't exist without rural areas and their food production.
A very small percentage of people living in rural areas are actually in food production.
Completely shut down tourism to areas of natural beauty and other recreational outdoors activities too far away from the prison-city?
Except for the elite who of course get to keep their private jets and superyachts...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Banning plastic bags at grocery store checkouts. But still allowing the store to sell their plastic kitchen garbage bags, and policy to only pickup recycling if it’s in a clear plastic bag instead of the old reusable blue bins.
And everything I buy from the store is encased in plastic (bananas! eggs! bread!).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which "tax or something" screws over the little guy while having absolutely no effect on the global climate?
Banning plastic bags at grocery store checkouts. But still allowing the store to sell their plastic kitchen garbage bags, and policy to only pickup recycling if it’s in a clear plastic bag instead of the old reusable blue bins.
The ban should have economic effects somewhere in the supply chain. One hopes the economic data will help policymakers understand the effects of eliminating those kitchen garbage bags, and then craft the arguments that influence people to change their behavior—-in other words a move was made. Now we need the data.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A very small percentage of people living in rural areas are actually in food production.
Would you want to remove all unnecessary humans from rural areas just to get rid of cars? Completely shut down tourism to areas of natural beauty and other recreational outdoors activities too far away from the prison-city? Except for the elite who of course get to keep their private jets and superyachts...
As to the other strawman arguments, it's besides my original point, but no I don't think we should forcefully move anyone. But it's just a simple fact that rural living and suburbia are heavily subsidized by the economic engines that are cities. And, accounting for economic production, cities have a much smaller environmental impact per capita.
I see benefits. Less burned wood and gas for warming indoors and less frozen people.