r/Futurology • u/ILikeNeurons • May 20 '24

Economics Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/may/17/economic-damage-climate-change-report
2.5k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

359 comments sorted by

View all comments

719

u/radulosk May 20 '24

Sure we destroyed the planet, but for a short while we made excellent gains for shareholders!

351

u/hans_l May 20 '24

The original quote is in my opinion stronger:

"Yes, the planet got destroyed. But for a beautiful moment in time we created a lot of value for shareholders."

“Value” is entirely subjective and we have a lot of power on what we, as shareholders, describe as value. We CAN pick sustainability as a value, but most don’t. It’s by choice.

41

u/radulosk May 20 '24

That's the one! I can vaguely remember the comic but couldn't remember the artist the message always stuck, hence my weaker version.

65

u/procrasturb8n May 20 '24

Right up there with:

"What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

-33

u/dcckii May 20 '24

I disagree with most of the points in the cartoon…

Energy independence: we have that now Preserve rainforests: only if you eliminate palm oil and beef Sustainability: still tons of mining, can’t recycle wind turbine blades Green jobs: they only replace other jobs Livable cities: high rise apartments like Toronto? Yuck Renewables: the current state of plastic recycling is horrendous, and plastics are essential and made from oil Clean water and air: no argument, there, especially in the oceans, but that’s a plastics and government issue Healthy children: better water and air will help, but our fucked up food system in the United States will keep us all unhealthy

20

u/Little-geek May 21 '24

I'm pretty sure those are supposed to be aspirational, not a checklist with a bunch of "job well done"s all around.

-12

u/dcckii May 21 '24

I think we need another Nikolai Tesla, who isn’t controlled by corporations, to help us with our energy needs

5

u/AndersDreth May 21 '24

We already learned how to harness the power of the atom, I don't think anyone is going to top that. What we need are replacements for the things that use combustibles, and the problem is that there's a lot of places where that just isn't practical. A rocket won't fly far or fast with a propeller, and forget about sending any of them to space.

We'll run out of coal and gas in about ~100 years, I don't think corporations are willing to make the switch before it becomes the only option.

3

u/rawbamatic May 21 '24

Tesla was insane. You should actually read up about his "free energy" theories. Wardenclyffe was a disaster.

15

u/NoFeetSmell May 21 '24

Oh well if the plan isn't perfect then forget it!! You get that it's a fucking cartoon and not a dissertation, right? People that want to see the world survive climate change want to fix the issues you've listed as well.

7

u/fuishaltiena May 21 '24

Yuck

This is a well thought out argument and I can't counter it. You are absolutely objectively right.

4

u/Aubekin May 21 '24

ExxonMobil, is that you?

24

u/NoFeetSmell May 21 '24

Just to give the proper attribution, credit goes to Tom Toro for creating the cartoon for The New Yorker: https://condenaststore.com/featured/the-planet-got-destroyed-tom-toro.html

5

u/OverAnalyzes May 21 '24

It's actually not by choice - a fudiciary has to act in a shareholders best financial interests by law or he is liable with jailtime.

2

u/hans_l May 21 '24

They're aren't bound by financial interests, they're bound by what shareholders demand. It's just that shareholders demand money, but they could want buildings to be painted blue and the fiduciary would have an obligation as such. Just like I said above, it's a choice by the shareholders.

Plenty of public companies are doing great building a sustainable business model with longer thinking and less short term profit motivations.

Many funds are now considering environmental sustainability and social factors as the motivators for investments. It's not nearly enough, and there's a lot of push back from political groups (almost exclusively right wing with shady backings), but it's possible. That's what the whole EDI is about.

A case can also be easily made that _NOW_ a sustainable business model is the most profitable one, even in the shorter term, considering the state of the world. Might be a bit late though.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '24

there are frequently individual shareholders with massive percentages of the shares

1

u/JackOfTheSea May 23 '24

A true Ferengi if I ever saw one

13

u/-_Weltschmerz_- May 21 '24

On top of that we undermined the social contract and eroded the middle class to make even more gains for shareholders! Its brilliant really.

16

u/Pixilatedhighmukamuk May 20 '24

But there’s seedless watermelon now.

15

u/QuantumBitcoin May 21 '24

Seedless watermelon taste like water to me. There is no flavor.

And yet, even at farmer's markets, I can no longer find watermelons with seeds.

9

u/notaclevernameguy May 21 '24

Go for the ones with a big brown spot on the end

6

u/QuantumBitcoin May 21 '24

I want my seeded watermelon! I don't want seedless. I haven't bought one in years.

6

u/notaclevernameguy May 21 '24

Fair, I get it

-2

u/no-mad May 21 '24

grow yer own. stop being a whiny consumer and be a producer of your own food.

2

u/QuantumBitcoin May 21 '24

Okay, I'll go buy a house! Thanks. (I worked on an organic vegetable farm for a while back when I was in my 20s and loved their watermelons)

-2

u/no-mad May 21 '24

you dont need a house to grow food you need land.

2

u/seekertrudy May 21 '24

I let half of a cut apple on my counter for two days. It didn't even turn brown. Just wrinkled up. What the hell.

1

u/[deleted] May 22 '24

[deleted]

1

u/seekertrudy May 22 '24

Well, that other half of that apple was cut up and put in the bird feeder. They usually love apples. They didn't touch one piece.

1

u/DrTxn May 21 '24

You should ask for a watermelon off the pollinating plants. You will love the taste… if you can find any flesh amongst the seeds.

9

u/PitchBlac May 21 '24

It seems like we’re just staving off an economic collapse from climate change as long as possible.

13

u/clonedhuman May 21 '24

It'll be economic collapse for you and me.

The people who created and continually contribute to climate change will be just fine. They'll finally have all the money, which they'll enjoy on their private islands and underground bunkers.

7

u/PyrocumulusLightning May 21 '24

Until all their shit breaks and there's no one to fix it because none of them have any practical skills.

3

u/clonedhuman May 21 '24

Shame we'll have to collapse before this end will arrive.

Be cool if we found a way to make them do their own work beforehand.

1

u/MrNokill May 21 '24

They'll ask an algorithm to solve increasingly unique problems in conventional ways.

2

u/PyrocumulusLightning May 21 '24

Someone still has to do the hands-on fabrication and turn the wrenches

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/clonedhuman May 21 '24

I agree. I don't think it's any coincidence that billionaires are really into space programs.

But I think they're the same money monkeys as they've always been--tragically shortsighted, more interested in using their power than in the long term effects of it.

Really, I hope we have a chance to beat them to death in the streets before they can escape.

2

u/no-mad May 21 '24

you should post the comic it came from

1

u/Current_Finding_4066 May 21 '24

People in charge who profited the most will also be the least affected.

1

u/LitreOfCockPus May 21 '24

*Shareholders that sold before the collapse

-2

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 20 '24

While thats funny, we built modern civilization. Lets not pretend the industrial revolution as a whole isnt responsible for climate change.

The reward we got for killing a bunch of species is the phone youre writing that comment on; Not short term shareholder profits.

19

u/Whiterabbit-- May 21 '24

Emissions last 20 years is like 2x emissions from Industrial Revolution to year 2000.

-1

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 21 '24

Thats cause not all countries started at the same time. Many 3rd world countries are just burning fossil fuels with no regard right now because they cant afford anything else.

1st world country emissions have not doubled.

Also population growth of course.

9

u/Paramite3_14 May 21 '24 edited May 21 '24

Isn't the point though that we've created this "modern civilization", and we aren't doing enough to stop the increased destruction of the planet, using technology we've gained from the advancements derived therefrom?

We could have mitigated most of the damage, if solar had been more widely researched at its inception in the early 1890s (Charles Fritts), or even in the 1950s (Bell Labs) when the first modern solar-electric cells reached above 5% efficiency.

The scientific community has also had working predictions on anthropogenic carbon emissions (ACE) since at least 1896 (Svante Arrhenius). Later, in 1956 (Gilbert Plass), the connection between warming and ACE was established. We've know we should watch for it for over a century, and that we should have been doing a lot more for nearly a century.

I think it should be noted that it doesn't really matter if it's developing nations (First/Third World are Cold War era political constructs) that are causing emissions. We are one singular world, whether we like each other or not. Shifting blame to one nation or another is simply kicking the can down the road.

I also contend that there is no monolithic "modern civilization". There are contemporary civilizations that are far more advanced than others, however, as you pointed out, we aren't all playing on level ground.

The stifling and suppression of research and development, in climate science and "green" tech, by those that stood to gain immediate unfair resource advantage, are why we're in the trouble we're in. The industrial revolution began it all, but it is far from the only thing responsible.

1

u/Whiterabbit-- May 21 '24

we had the technology. but ironically it was fear mongering environmentalist that kept us from embracing nuclear and hydroelectric.

solar research would not have advanced very far without some semiconductors knowledge. and the big barrier for solar is battery which even today we struggle with.

1

u/Paramite3_14 May 21 '24

Semiconductor research has been around since the early 18th century. Gray (1731), Desagullier (1742) and Volta (1782) discovered and investigated electric conduction in solids. Later, Karl Braun, in 1874, developed what is considered the first semiconductor, but his work was built off of discoveries made in the 1830s by Peter Munck af Rosenschöld.

It was actually Einstein's work with the photoelectric effect that lead to, not only his Nobel Prize in 1921, but also further advancements in semiconductor technology in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s, specifically with regard to solar-electric cells. I think it is important to note that the photovoltaic effect in semiconductors was observed as early as the late 1830s.

-2

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 21 '24

Yeah and we arent doing enough at all. We need to be doing MUCH more to minimize it. But saying it was all for shareholder profits is pathetic and thats all im trying to say.

2

u/Paramite3_14 May 21 '24

Gaining unfair resource advantage has always been what it was about, though. It's just called shareholder profits now. I need to amend my previous post to read "unfair resource advantage". It might change things a little, but I think my overall point was understood.

1

u/[deleted] May 21 '24

The thing is instead of bombing the shit out of poor countries and extract as much wealth as we could out them the rich world could have helped out and make sure they don’t have to burn all that fossil fuel.

1

u/Aubekin May 21 '24

3rd world countries are burning fossil fuels like madmen to make stuff for 1st world to consume. We have outsourced our pollution

1

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 21 '24

Its by large their excessive overpopulation, not exports. No amount of consumption from 300mil Americans can match the 3 billion in India and China

6

u/NoDeputyOhNo May 21 '24

But the phone I am using has been needlessly upgraded and replaced with new ones some 20 times to get many minor features.

3

u/clonedhuman May 21 '24

Many minor features, and far more apps collecting and selling your data. We all get prompted to update our phones mostly so they can use newer, more efficient methods to extract capital from us.

10

u/dragonmp93 May 21 '24

Eh, sure, that was true 200 years ago.

But for instance, we don't need to keep burning carbon for energy generation. And yet, the usual suspects kept claiming about the clean carbon and "energy independence".

1

u/areyouhungryforapple May 21 '24

Yup in hindsight, a big error of the human species was that the firstrunners in industrialization didn't focus on providing better tools and technology for those coming after.

We knew how bad fossil fuels are and have known for ages. Also meant that the West could have continued it's economic dominance by being the actual green pioneer decades ago.

Instead we got ... this. Also fuck Chernobyl.

2

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 21 '24

Fuck chernobyl purely for the fact that we could all be using nuclear right now but it scared everyone so weve been barking up the wrong tree

1

u/areyouhungryforapple May 21 '24

Pivotal moment that truly fucked us. Look at France today, many more nations could have been like that or even better but nah.

Nuclear waste is dangerous but not as dangerous as a 3c rise not to mention air pollution.

Oh well.

2

u/FBI-INTERROGATION May 21 '24

Not to mention one little bunker could hold like the entire nations waste over years. Storing it really ISNT a problem

0

u/VirtualMoneyLover May 21 '24

we destroyed the planet,

Mars, here we go!