141–150 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So, don't buy anything containing electronics?
Produce political solutions that steer the market towards developing electronics domestically again, or reducing the need for such electronics in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but the point is the danger from the warming contribution is less than the danger from an ozone hole, so why focus on the warming? Unless the ozone depletion is below the recovery rate.
The combined emissions of CFC-13, CFC-112a, CFC-113a, CFC-114a and CFC-115 increased from 1.6 ± 0.2 to 4.2 ± 0.4 ODP-Gg yr-1 (CFC-11-equivalent ozone-depleting potential) between 2010 and 2020. The anticipated impact of these emissions on stratospheric ozone recovery is small. However, ongoing emissions of the five CFCs of focus may negate some of the benefits gained under the Montreal Protocol if they continue to ri…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The collective annual warming effect of these five chemicals on the planet is equivalent to the emissions produced by a small country like Switzerland. Why is warming effect what matters here? During the original CFC crisis, it was the hole in the ozone layer we were more worried about.
Both matter, though warming wasn't considered a big deal, the media was still coming away from warning about a coming ice age (i've never figured out what was going on there, as a kid I heard it more than once, but now few admit the scare existed). The ozone hole was a big deal. Now that CFCs are banned the ozone layer is recovering. I'm guessing these emissions are not really enough to harm the ozone layer much (so…
The media lying is what happened. Either because they don't know anything about any subject and misunderstood some very non-surprising papers or because somebody was paying them to lie so people wouldn't believe on global warming.
It's hard to say how much of what reason.
And nowadays people go scrutinize the scientific papers to find the bad ones... and there aren't any. Because there were never any, the entire thing waas invented elsewhere.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do the difficult thing. Stop buying from China. As consumers, buy things with a transparent supply chain. Look for ESG reports on the companies you buy from. The hard part of this is it requires consumers to be educated and act. This almost never happens unless the costs for not acting are built into the prices of goods. Doing that requires political will. It's going to make a lot of people very angry; and we're not…
I might suggest the slightly less difficult thing that I think could be reasonably politically accomplished. Introduce carbon tariffs on goods imported from dirty countries to make their products less competitive and provide an incentive to clean up manufacturing.
The price ceilings should be set based on some amount of maximum profit margin companies should be allowed to make. If they want to make bigger margins they're going to have to move manufacturing to cleaner countries and then they can apply their insane markups.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both matter, though warming wasn't considered a big deal, the media was still coming away from warning about a coming ice age (i've never figured out what was going on there, as a kid I heard it more than once, but now few admit the scare existed). The ozone hole was a big deal. Now that CFCs are banned the ozone layer is recovering. I'm guessing these emissions are not really enough to harm the ozone layer much (so…
>as a kid I heard it more than once, but now few admit the scare existed. People very rarely admit to backing the wrong horse that. Nobody will tell you they sold AAPL and MSFT stock in the 90s. Nobody will tell you they believed the racist propaganda back in the 60s. Nobody will tell you they believed Iraq had WMDs in the 00s. Nobody will tell you that they believed the people who were saying Long Island would soon…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This isn't a fight we can win The right doesn't even believe that climate change is real, they aren't participating in any fight.
Declaring your own countrymen an enemy in a war that countries five times our size is winning is not going to convince them to join your side.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>as a kid I heard it more than once, but now few admit the scare existed. People very rarely admit to backing the wrong horse that. Nobody will tell you they sold AAPL and MSFT stock in the 90s. Nobody will tell you they believed the racist propaganda back in the 60s. Nobody will tell you they believed Iraq had WMDs in the 00s. Nobody will tell you that they believed the people who were saying Long Island would soon…
I certainly advocated for action in Iraq in the early 2000s. I have a naive world view, informed I guess by a lot of 90s American media output, about America saving the world, Iraq was one of those opportunities.
But let's see, tell 800k armed angry men they are out of a job and tell them to "go home, please don't steal any AK47s on your way out, mmmkay thanks goodbye go home and be a good boy now"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The combined emissions of CFC-13, CFC-112a, CFC-113a, CFC-114a and CFC-115 increased from 1.6 ± 0.2 to 4.2 ± 0.4 ODP-Gg yr-1 (CFC-11-equivalent ozone-depleting potential) between 2010 and 2020. The anticipated impact of these emissions on stratospheric ozone recovery is small. However, ongoing emissions of the five CFCs of focus may negate some of the benefits gained under the Montreal Protocol if they continue to ri…
Gg, Tg? Is that Giga-gram and Tera-gram? Why not kg, the SI standard unit for mass?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>as a kid I heard it more than once, but now few admit the scare existed. People very rarely admit to backing the wrong horse that. Nobody will tell you they sold AAPL and MSFT stock in the 90s. Nobody will tell you they believed the racist propaganda back in the 60s. Nobody will tell you they believed Iraq had WMDs in the 00s. Nobody will tell you that they believed the people who were saying Long Island would soon…
There was like one story in a popular science magazine once that got a lot of play, and many people heard about it because it's a vivid story. That's about the extent of it. Climate change deniers also keep it alive because enlarging it validates their distrust of scientists.
It was delivered with an imprimatur of authority from multiple sources and left an imprint for a long time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I might suggest the slightly less difficult thing that I think could be reasonably politically accomplished. Introduce carbon tariffs on goods imported from dirty countries to make their products less competitive and provide an incentive to clean up manufacturing.
I want to go one step further than this idea and introduce carbon tariffs on imported goods coupled with price ceilings so corporations can't pass off the tariffs to wealthy people and still profit. The corporations should be paying these taxes and their bottom line should suffer if they're selling dirty goods. They should not be able to make the profit margins they're making today by manufacturing cheap trash in Chi…
It's an incredibly easy way to close a whole bunch of tax loopholes at once.