we cant consume our way out of climate change
this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
46 points (87.1% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5194 readers
1209 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
But this is a perfect way to make money by green labeling."use ours because we save you 20% electricity" so therefore our brands are creating less ghgs.
This sounds like consumerism with extra steps to me, since emissions are mostly coming from industry, not individuals.
A lot of carbon has to be emitted for the manufacturing and distribution of goods and a lot of the time it exceeds their lifetime energy consumption (and its equivalent carbon emission).
Best case scenario would be making goods more modular and reliable, so it doesn't need replacement as soon, and making it so older ones can be updated or at least mantained for longer.
e: I'm not even considering material cost and extraction.
Which is why its so brilliant. People are being forced to be consumers with a consciousness(EV). So if they can take advantage of it well more money.
True. But we also do need to manufacture a lot. Renewables, batteries, insulation, hobs and heaters, probably houses too. Unless you want everyone to live without heat and electricity.
The best bet it government spending on public transport and communities and the reduction in work hours. That will make people do more instead of spend more.
No it won't. We can't consume our way out of this. It'll be won in drastic legislation.
Which means it won't be won.
Probably. By the time legislators get on board, it'll be way too late. It's already too late, but it'll be too late to avoid even the most disastrous consequences.
Yep. We're on course for the worst of it thanks to the oil companies convincing half the population climate change isn't even real.
Let's not forget all the paid politicians, shills, current deniers, and every single company that chooses profit over doing what's right (so, all of them). We're all culpable to varying extents. But people in power had a responsibility to the rest of us, and they chose greed and power when given the opportunity.
So we're going to ambush oil billionaires while they're shopping for appliances?
omg nyt! sometimes you're so embarrassing
No it fucking won't lol
I love that the illustration is of solar panels being installed on a roof. I didn’t realize you bought those in the appliance aisle.
The fight for ad dollars will be won in the NYT opinion section
One of the neatest things I've learned about on Technology Connections was an induction cooktop that used 120V electricity. It had a bank of batteries in it that would provide power for cooking without overloading the mains, and you could plug appliances into it in the event of a power failure and still be able to cook.
If you had appliances storing energy like that you could level out demand curves. And you can also store energy with heat. If we had temperature regulator valves on our water heaters, we could get them to 160-170 degrees when energy is cheap and let them coast down to 120. Heating water is one of the major energy expenditures for a home, so if we could get that to be 100% renewable would be a huge advance.
I've heard it said many times. There are no silver bullets to climate change. Many solutions have to be researched, discovered, developed, and implemented.