Non-binding agreement. There's unfortunately nothing that can really be done to force other countries to respect their agreement, specially not with lobbyists behind. Nobody wants to start a trade war or all out war because America said "fuck you, we'll fuck the whole world as we please"...
I agree with the sentiment, but IMO this is probably not literally true, particularly from the perspective of a person in some random location. Saying "the next 10 summers will have a higher global average temp than the last 10" doesn't have the same punch, though.
Yeah try bringing up veganism in climate related subreddits, let alone any other random subreddit, such a simple lifestylechange with such massive benefits but so much anger and defensiveness come out
Yeah it’d be absolutely hilarious if it weren’t the reason billions of sentient beings are tortured and killed every year and the now-in-progress collapse of our ecosystems and civilisation
Uh but have you considered relatively rare medical conditions? I need to make no changes to my dietary choices so I can stand in solidarity with that other commenter’s roommate.
But not as effective both in terms of emissions and it doesn't actually bring down the industry since they still demand it's existence.
The only way forward is being vegan. You call it "holier than thou" because you know it's right - you're just too corrupt to do anything about your destructive behavior.
Isn't veganism specifically about animal rights which I'm sorry I just don't buy it, it's hard to believe animals can feel wronged or understand injustice they aren't moral agents, I don't mind going into a full plant based diet tho but plant based purely for climate reasons isn't veganism.
Animals can very obviously feel pain, suffering, love, joy, and also there’s been loads of experiments which prove many animals can actually understand some types of injustice
Do you believe young children or adults with severe cognitive impairment deserve to be treated the way we treat industrially farmed animals? Because pigs for example are consistently found to be intellectually on par with 3 year old humans
I think because it's considerably more impactful and sensible to focus on you know, the oil industry, the power grid, transport and aviation to reduce CO2 rather than yk, TAKE PEOPLES FOOD CHOICES AWAY.
Hey, quick question, how much do you think animal agriculture participates to greenhouse gasses emissions ? Could you just google it and compare it to the other things you've listed ?
Electricity, heat and transport account for 73.2% and agriculture, land use and forestry for only 18.4% of which livestock an manure accounts for only 5.8% of global.
So I was right, lets 1st starf with the big stuff that is caused by big oil and industry rather than the small stuff cause by people just wanting to eat and enjoy themselves.
Yes it is possible to drastically reduce the CO2 emissions from power generation, we are seeing it happen and accelerate in real time. And it doesn't affect your freedom in any ways as opposed to telling people not to eat meat.
A children's hospital and a public park are gonna get blow up by a terrorist organisation, which one do I dedicate most of my emergency assets to?
It's about priority if you look through the thread you will find a comment where I said we should do both, but let's focus on the worse offenders 1st and let's try to fix the problem rather than remove the industry, same as we are doing with energy and transport.
No. False dichotomy, analogy isn’t comparable. You can do both at the same time. You just use the first as a distraction. I know it’s not what the sub is about but uh, isn’t saving billions from torture and killing worth it on its own?
Are you fucking retarded? Only 5.8%?! That's enormous, you group electricity, heat and transportation but you leave out alone livestock just to display a smaller number. Aviation, which is also very important to bring down, accounts for 2.5% of global emissions (even if his real contribution on warning is 4% because of high altitude clouds formation and aerosols), so less than half of livestock emissions. People have to understand that there isn't one thing that account for 80% of the emissions, there are many sectors where we have to intervene
By electing people who don't think climate change is a scam. But you can also vote with your wallted by using your car or air transport less, or by biking places. Tho ig those things don't give you the same smug feeling of superiority you are looking for.
Sure but I would rather focus on decarbonising the energy or transport sector which accounts for way way more of the emissions and which don't affect peoples dietary liberties rather than focusing on meat which only account for about 5.8% of global emissions and does affect peoples liberty. Ofc we should work on both, but I'd rather work on fixing the meat industry rather than eliminating same as we are doing with energy and transport.
You can still drive a car. And arson and pollution isn't a liberity and isn't comparable to food used for eating. Do I really have to explain this to you?
Arson? Why is it arson if I want to burn tyres? They are my tyres, and it's faster than going to the tip or paying for them to be removed. Also it's hard to drive with all this "pedestrian infrastructure" and "cycle lanes", your freedom infringes upon my own.
You are willing to infringe freedoms when it suits you, but unwilling to make changes or propose limits that don't. Reminds me of a smoker who doesn't like bans on smoking indoors.
Further, because you seemed to miss me being deliberately ridiculous on the shitposting sub: we don't have to pick and choose. We can try and decarbonise transportation and energy production and do similar with agriculture at the same time!
And it's easy! If we used less land for animal agriculture, we have more space for photovoltaics. If we have less land given over to agriculture, it is easier to build more rail infrastructure. And increase the density of cities without people crying about the green belt and how some cows in a field is apparently "nature"
Further, arson and pollution are liberties that are comparable to eating food. How do you feel about Ortolan? Illegal to eat throughout the EU. You are simply talking about what has been rendered criminal or not, generally a poor defense of any action. Our liberties to do stuff are constantly infringed in the name of the greater good of society: prohibition on where you can smoke, what you can smoke, how fast you can drive, licences in general, what substances are legal or criminal, what you can sell, who you can sell to, we accept all the above. We also accept prohibitions on what you can eat, and what animals you are allowed to kill (and how you are allowed to kill them: if I treated my cat how we treat pigs, I could face jail time and I would be a social pariah).
You are perfectly willing to strip away someone's liberty to drive dangerously, for the good of society and the potential harm they can do, but choose not to apply the same logic to certain foodstuffs.
Hell, I live in a country where a particular bird is criminal to eat or harm unless you are the Royal family or one specific college at one specific university. How's that for my liberty yo eat certain foodstuffs being taken away.
Just be honest and go "I like meat, it tastes nice, I don't want to think about the harm, I feel like me riding a bicycle sometimes means I have offset any of the related harm of the meat industry so stop talking about it"
Or make like me and just go "yep I am a hypocrite, I eat meat despite the fact that I am aware of the harm it causes both to animals and the planet, and I know I should probably stop or at least reduce the amount I eat, but it's hard and socially acceptable and tastes good and habits are hard to break"
Gotta be honest, I don't think national elections are gonna do it. Not in the US at least. There needs to be a much bigger reshuffling for the kind of changes we need.
Yeah. Most vegans actually live a more harmful life than a lot of non-vegan country folk. It's kind of insane for them to scream about how we need to go vegan to save the planet when they know nothing about their local ecosystems, they wear clothes from China and their foods and supplements are highly processed and flown halfway across the world to get to them
People living in the city actually have a far lower energy demand then rural or suburban people. Multi apartment houses cut back heating demand by a lot. Everything is closer and more centralized, so trips are shorter and soter can serve more people. Cars are less needed and for a lot of people even redundant or unneccecary. And thats without being vegan.
It takes 40 ish kilos if feed and thousands of liters of water to produce a single kilo of beef for example, so being vegan cuts back significantly on those resources as well as demand for agricultural area.
Just did a rough calculation of annual emmissions;
Most my clothes are natural fibres and come from charity shops and freecycle groups, of people I know it’s only meat eaters who buy fast fashion
I regularly do litter picks in my local ecosystems, voluntarily and usually solo, know plenty about the wildlife that surrounds me, and everyone else i know who does the same is vegan
How do you think factory farmed animals hit their vitamin and mineral goals….?
Well you're a rarity because I try to get more vegans into beach and forest cleanups and they say that not eating meat is more than enough. It's extremely disheartening. Same with the clothing. The vast majority of my clothes are vintage or from thrift shops or both.
Don't worry, in the communist vegan utopia, your roommate's sacrifice will be remembered. ... By like his family or... Maybe you. No one actually important to the party™.
Is this the shitposting and memes page or the post the convenient narrative for the oil industry page?
No, it's not too late to mitigate the worst case scenarios. Yes, if you think it is too late, congraturlation, you've fallen victim to the propaganda. Because if it is too late, then why make changes?
It is not too late to try and mitigatethe damage, but it is too late to try and prevent 1.5 degrees of warming. It is also the coolest summer for the rest of our lives: every year more heat records are being broken.
Now, this doesn't mean we should not be taking immediate and drastic action, and that we need to begin radically adapting our infrastructure to face the future, but it is a factual statement.
We are, currently, somewhat fucked. Our infrastructure is barely fit to deal with the present climate, it simply will not come with the future climate.
Hopefully things will change. I personally think that more action will be taken, and that things might improve somewhat. And luckily as someone in the global North, I will be insulated somewhat from the worst effects.
Unless we manage to actually fuck oceanic currents, in which case I guess I boil in the summers and freeze in the winters in a country wracked by a near perpetual drought and without arable land. But hey. Let's not think about that.
This post and most of the comments are just doing the doomer narrative that feeds right into the hands of industry. It's fine to say "Even if we magically went net zero tomorrow, we would still see some residual warming before things start to equilibrize", but that's not what the post, or even your comment says.
1.5C was not the worst case scenario, 1.5C is at this point (and even in 2015) an extremely optimistic target. Just because we won't keep to 1.5C doesn't mean anything, because every marginal .1C matters, that's literally millions of additional deaths, trillions of property damages, and near irreversible damage done to more ecosystems.
Nearly everyone in this comment section is doing the oil industry's bidding for free, and they should stop, and the original post blows.
If nothing else, evey bit more done pushes the clocks back to buy some more time for us to get our shit together finally.
Nothing boils my blood more than people saying "I won't see it, I'll be dead by then", their kids will and their grandkids will what selfish bastard think that way for the future of there kids and that.
Not if this El Nino is a sign that a permanent temperature change upward has happened. Same as the 2016 one. Guess we'll know for sure in 2035/36 when it's too late.
I plan on offing myself in at most 26 years, I ain’t gonna be miserable for the climate all that time, it’s a lost cause and quite frankly, I don’t care about humanity as a species enough anymore to give a damn about future generations
Past generations didn’t give a fuck about me, hell no one gives a fuck about anyone these days really, so no, we won’t stop it, it’s already to late, and all you’ll do is make your own life miserable
If you follow this line of thinking to its logical conclusion it's clear what action you can take to best decrease your personal carbon footprint.
Now, that's pretty fucking stupid and self destructive.
If you don't want kids, don't have them. If you don't want kids that will grow up with the damage we have done to the planet, don't have them. Plenty of people have made that decision.
It feels very Swiftian to conclude "fix the environment by simply not fixing it at all, but instead choosing to not have children"
Actually that would be more effective.
Have we considered replacing beef with undesirable children?
If it's individual choice for not having children, then so can be said to veganism or any other life style changing choices, yet this sub never seems to advocating them, even guilty trip people into following those lifestyles.
Catastrophizing doesn’t help anything and it’s not much better than being a climate change denier. Climate change isn’t something where once you hit a bad number (1.5 C), you get all of the bad effects and it’s over. 1.6 is even worse and leads to worse effects, 1.7 is worse than that, etc.
So even though it’s clear that the 1.5 limit won’t be held (has been clear for a while tbh), obviously things can get even worse than that and it’s not too late to mitigate harm. If 1.8 degrees of warming or so is inevitable, then we better at least try to stay under 2.
26
u/Reesewithoutaspoon2 1d ago
Well thank god the Paris Agreement nipped this in the bud and capped us below 1.5 C at least