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

Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 245 posts

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#231

Post by boxed »

pfdietz wrote: post #47
boxed wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It hasn't worked with nuclear waste, has it? You mean the nuclear waste that we banned companies from using as nuclear fuel for modern reactors? I think you will find that regulation actually stopped us from solving this problem. > It's not working for corals either. Imagine if we had much more nuclear power so we didn't produce enormous amounts of CO2! The corals would be in a much better position. The "environmen…

> You mean the nuclear waste that we banned companies from using as nuclear fuel for modern reactors? There is no need to ban this because it (and reprocessing in general) is economically idiotic. It would be like saying government bans prevent companies from setting money on fire. Dry cask storage is a quite acceptable and economical way to deal with nuclear waste. The demand that something permanent be done immedia…

Sure, it's fine, but we've ALSO effectively banned research into reactor types that use "nuclear waste" as fuel. In Sweden it's not even effectively, we had laws on the books until quite recently that banned nuclear research.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#232

Post by api »

jeffbee wrote: post #229
api wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s an extremely privileged kind of nostalgia. Only the wealthy can romanticize poverty. The solution to nostalgia for farming is for people to try it. I used to live in Asheville NC years ago. There were a lot of hippie back to the land types that came there to find themselves. It’s that kind of place. Sometimes they’d decide to become farmers. This usually lasted at best one year. Sometimes it lasted weeks.

There's a book about being the child of back-to-the-land hippies called "Against the Country" that I enjoyed and recommend to all who might be tempted.

Some of the groups around Asheville were "eco villages" that could get rather culty, including the kinds of high control abuses that occur in cults. All groups weren't like this but I recall hearing some crazy stories involving shaming people into giving money to the group (while the higher ups are "more equal" than everyone else) and sexual exploitation.

There was one case where the group leader/organizer ran away with a bunch of cash, and one or two people tried to sue but they'd set up some kind of shell company structure and had conned people into signing things that made it hard to sue or press criminal charges. I think they also left the other members on the hook for a property lease, since the things they'd been conned into signing did that too. It looked a lot like an explicit long con targeting the hippie trust fund kids that would come around. Sex abuse too apparently.

I heard more than one story that mentioned members of the Hells Angels, at least allegedly.

This is another aspect of small insular communities in the good old days that the trads and anarcho-primitivists (left-trads) don't talk about. It still happens in small communities today, but a lot less due to the presence of larger scale nation states with laws and law enforcement. If the sheriff in your tiny rural town rapes you, you could try to bring charges at the state level or at least sue. Worst case you can move, and with a global money system you can sell your home and take the cash with you. Without that larger context, there is no recourse. If your local tribal chief, town sheriff, or cult leader wants to take your stuff, pressure you into polygamy, or rape your kids, there's nothing you can do about it. Back to nature!

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#233

Post by pfdietz »

boxed wrote: post #231
pfdietz wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You mean the nuclear waste that we banned companies from using as nuclear fuel for modern reactors? There is no need to ban this because it (and reprocessing in general) is economically idiotic. It would be like saying government bans prevent companies from setting money on fire. Dry cask storage is a quite acceptable and economical way to deal with nuclear waste. The demand that something permanent be done immedia…

Sure, it's fine, but we've ALSO effectively banned research into reactor types that use "nuclear waste" as fuel. In Sweden it's not even effectively, we had laws on the books until quite recently that banned nuclear research.

> effectively banned

This simply isn't true. Not as much may have been invested in said research, but that's more a reflection of the lack of a business case for such things. They are not a magical panacea to all of nuclear's woes.

Your logic reminds me of people who confuse consumer preference with boycotts.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#234

Post by Geee »

gnarlouse wrote: post #217
Geee wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, externalities should be priced somehow, and this is the core problem, but demanding or forcing people to limit consumption is wrong.

I mean, doesn't that fall out of pricing externalities sort of naturally? What's the difference if you're told all new cars cost $500k, vs being told not to buy a new car? You can't reasonably afford it either way.

Yes, prices would limit consumption of stuff that has externalities priced in, but also push producers to reduce their externalities, if they're littering the world with poisons etc. It's not $500K, but something reasonable like $5K (for cars) which reduces demand.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#235

Post by projektfu »

pfdietz wrote: post #226
projektfu wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it seems there is a median projection of mild decline way in the future. There are also reasonably probable scenarios that show no decline, or more precipitous decline. However, they generally agree that there will be at least 1 billion more people in the world, most likely 2 billion, and possibly more. What is the real risk of the Earth eventually going back toward having 8 billion people after reaching 10 billio…

The real risk is the TFR never rises and population drops until complex society cannot be maintained. Or perhaps some weird minority with higher TFR takes over the world, what I call the "Amish Scenario".

Are you talking mainly about demographics? Like not enough working age people and too many older people?

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#236

Post by M95D »

scoofy wrote: post #216
rTX5CMRXIfFG wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re not really addressing the obvious though: that at the rate that we are consuming and polluting the earth, we could be pushing ourselves into extinction faster than the sun could just naturally swallow up the earth. I don’t think anyone is debating this eventual death of our star, but our astronomers would very much like to live long enough for us to find another home planet and develop the technology to get th…

I mean, I’m advocating for renewable resources… that doesn’t me arbitrarily stopping consumption. It means reorienting consumption to being responsible. Mechanized farming, for example, prevents famine because it’s wildly more efficient than subsistence farming. Arbitrary “degrowth” does not address the fact that consumption isn’t arbitrary.

Most consumption is arbitrary.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#237

Post by M95D »

scoofy wrote: post #201
M95D wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Earth is limited. Resources are limited. You can't recycle to infinity. Each time you recycle something, the material recovered is worse than before. Steel is weaker, plastic has impurities and is not clear/transparent, paper isn't white and it contaminates the printers with dust, etc. To keep maintaining quality, fresh material must always be added to the recycled one. Everything we dig out of the Earth is non-renew…

>You can't recycle to infinity. The lifespan of the earth is not infinite, pretending it is is foolish. We have about 5 billion years on earth before it will be consumed by the sun. Presuming an infinite earth creates a very obvious, simple, and wrong conclusion about something that is actually very difficult problem. >The logical conclusion is that at some point we run out of resources. The point of renewable resour…

Continue your argument. Don't stop at solar. In the next 5 billion years we must leave. How do you propose we do that if we focus on fast fashion and changing cars every 2 years?

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#238

Post by scoofy »

M95D wrote: post #237
scoofy wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You can't recycle to infinity. The lifespan of the earth is not infinite, pretending it is is foolish. We have about 5 billion years on earth before it will be consumed by the sun. Presuming an infinite earth creates a very obvious, simple, and wrong conclusion about something that is actually very difficult problem. >The logical conclusion is that at some point we run out of resources. The point of renewable resour…

Continue your argument. Don't stop at solar. In the next 5 billion years we must leave. How do you propose we do that if we focus on fast fashion and changing cars every 2 years?

I’m skeptical how much those things are contributing to the end of society. My main concern is GHGs, after that, these behaviors are wasteful, yes, but the vast majority of the limited resources can be recaptured.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#239

Post by scoofy »

M95D wrote: post #236
scoofy wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I’m advocating for renewable resources… that doesn’t me arbitrarily stopping consumption. It means reorienting consumption to being responsible. Mechanized farming, for example, prevents famine because it’s wildly more efficient than subsistence farming. Arbitrary “degrowth” does not address the fact that consumption isn’t arbitrary.

Most consumption is arbitrary.

I don’t actually know that is true.

How much of out consumption is food, housing, healthcare, and transportation of those things? I suspect it’s well over 50% of income.

Re: Obsession with growth is destroying nature, 150 countries warn

#240

Post by boxed »

pfdietz wrote: post #233
boxed wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, it's fine, but we've ALSO effectively banned research into reactor types that use "nuclear waste" as fuel. In Sweden it's not even effectively, we had laws on the books until quite recently that banned nuclear research.

> effectively banned This simply isn't true. Not as much may have been invested in said research, but that's more a reflection of the lack of a business case for such things. They are not a magical panacea to all of nuclear's woes. Your logic reminds me of people who confuse consumer preference with boycotts.

The lack of a business case is do to the regulatory environment. The nuclear regulatory agency that was set up to license new nuclear plants just didn't. For decades they stalled all applications. That's why the industry died.
Post reply on HN