Has anybody else given up on climate change?

In My Humble Opinion
1

Have anybody else given up on climate change?

I confess that I have.

It seems to me that even if we could get the entire planet to resolutely agree on stopping or at least seriously slowing down climate change, we’re basically too late. Fossil fuels are still the mainstay of our energy sources, supplemented by hydroelectric, nuclear, geothermal, solar and wind technologies. But it isn’t likely that solar and wind energy will be able to take up the slack in the foreseeable future, even allowing for severe conservation measures, while geothermal is only practical in some areas and we would need decades to build enough nuclear power plants to substantially reduce dependence on fossil fuels.

However, we don’t have a solid international accord on reducing carbon emissions. China and India are the worst offenders, and neither shows any inclination to seriously reduce their emissions.

So I don’t know. I’ve just plain gotten down off the band wagon. I’ll keep making my token efforts to reduce my carbon footprint if only so I can honestly say I tried to do my part, but I’m just not going to worry myself sick about it any more.

I feel so much better since I gave up all hope.

2

Pretty much what you said, yes.
I’m assuming/hoping i’ll be gone before the shit really hits the f*n.
(Although i’d say it’s more of an IMHO than a GD.)

3

Thing is, for any scenario where many bad effects can still come (a very likely outcome) there are worse scenarios that can come if we as a whole do give up.

The objective then is to works towards mitigating the most likely effects to come, while fighting to prevent truly disastrous results.

But don’t just give up, and say:

Well, is too late now, so let’s just do nothing.

This kind of despair is ultimately no more helpful than just denying climate science in the first place. Ultimately they both lead to the same thing: Doing nothing.

It’s why writer Mary Annaïse Heglar refers to it as: De-Nihilism.

The reality is every bit of warming matters and so every action we can take to slow down and limit global warming also matters. Of course we should try to limit global warming to the targets we’ve agreed to for good reason.

But even if we miss those, it’s never too late to stop global warming from becoming even worse.

4

I am thinking quite the opposite, until quite recently there were not alternatives available for the masses. We are beginning to get them now, practical cost effective methods which are around parody with fossil fuel consuming methods. And the good news is people are choosing them in greater numbers than I would have ever imagined. Greater adoption should cause lower prices, and encourage greater innovation.

Before there was nothing we could do that was practical, nothing I could do that was practical. Sure the Al Gores could live a carbon neutral lifestyle, but as long as the super rich hordes the fruits of other people’s labor, that was not anything meaningful, as the masses simply could not do that. Back then I was discouraged, as there was nothing anyone could do that was meaningful. Now I have options and some of them give me a ability to strive towards carbon neutrality as the better choice.

I am hopeful there is a tipping point that we have or soon will reach, when the economics dictate renewables, at which time it will be a advantage to go that way.

As for the carbon already dumped into the atmosphere, yes most likely not a good thing, and we will be paying for that for generations, barring God’s intervention, or terraformation technology, but that doesn’t mean we can’t stop pushing it further, and our current situation is something that humans, most animals and plants seemingly can adapt to. But the further we go the more we lose.

5

I missed on the last post that I quoted from the Climate Adam short video in the cite.

It has also a very funny metaphor in the video on how the OPs position can look like:

An observer not bothering to stop someone from beating another telling us that (Paraphrase:) “hey, it is too late to prevent the damage the one beating you did already, so we should not bother to stop it”
Person still being hit in the face: “uh, it is getting worse, help here?”

6

I agree too.
But I wonder what a horrible thing a f*n may be if you star it but spell out shit: Is it a fan? A fen? A fin? A fun? Does a fon exist?

7

I’ve been part of this fight in a small way longer than most I would guess. Starting back in the 90s. We’ve wasted a lot of time, far too much time. For much of that time the US was the worst offender.

There is still time to reduce the damage we’ve caused. But we really need a lot more commitment by all governments. We need to start holding faceless corporation really responsible for the damage they caused. But we also need as many people as possible to do what they can.

Same story as 16 years ago.

There is no magic bullet that will fix everything, it will take a lot of work in a lot of areas.

  • Energy efficient appliances need to be mandatory. We need to keep increasing these efficiencies and have buybacks of old inefficient appliances. This isn’t just Fridges and Dryers, this is also pretty much everything that plugs in that just use electricity while doing nothing.
  • Building efficient homes and buildings with proper insulation.
  • Reducing Cement usage in building
  • Decreasing greatly coal and oil usage and/or cleaning it up at least.
  • Renewables, Solar, Wind, Tidal, etc.
  • Improved transmission lines.
  • Using state of the art, safer nuclear power has to be considered.
  • We’ve made great strides in lighting, LEDs have cut energy use significantly and we need to strive towards a goal of 99% LEDs.
  • Wash Clothes in cold water
  • Plant more trees
  • and there are many more small things.
  • Low emission or no emission cars and trucks is a big one
  • Fly less, improve the emissions of airlines
  • Shipping is another often overlooked area. Freighters are notoriously dirty.

I installed Solar Panels on my last house back in 2003 and I was only middle class and not rich. Thankfully they worked well and paid for themselves and then some.

Switching to CFLs and then LED bulbs and being a hawk about turning off lights when not in use.

Very small, but I use cloth bags mostly and make a small difference with less plastic bags.

Cold water washing works well, especially with detergents designed for it. It is sadly hard to find the inexpensive Tide Cold Water, but I have mostly used that for about 10 years now.

When I buy appliances, I always consider energy efficiency. Good for the environment and my wallet in the long run.

This year in our new home, I upgraded my water heater to a super efficient one and got my attic insulated to an r46 rating. There is interest free loan system to pay for all this through the gas company. My energy use is already significantly lower than the prior residents last year. We have 4 people vs. 2. It should be more significant heading into the heating season. My house stayed cooler. We never run out of hot water either as a nice bonus. The old heater did.

When I commuted 20,000 miles a year, I bought a Prius. 11 years later, my daughter is driving it. Great car, reliable and so gas efficient.

If you commute over 15,000 miles a year, please consider a hybrid or EV. It makes a real difference.

I’m going to stop now as I can keep going for quite a while more.

Think Green, think Clean and Recycle and Reuse.

8

I think climate change is little different than other, similar “environmental” or even social issues. You can feel silly turning the tap off while brushing your teeth to save water, or turning down your thermostat to conserve energy, when huge organizations/industries routinely waste vastly more resources. And then you blow all of your contributions by taking one plane trip.

I think there is little benefit to being too much in the front lines. Instead, I focus on living what I think is a “good life.” No, I am not reducing my lifestyle to one that is scaleable worldwide. One thing I do is vote for politicians and support proposals which would encourage prices to reflect “true costs.” And I’ve tried to improve the social aspect of my consumer choices. Products SHOULD reflect a living wage for employees. Fuel SHOULD be expensive. Ridiculously wealthy folk SHOULD pay their fair share.

But then economists and such will talk about the benefit to the economy of cheap fuel, the various benefits that accrue from tax policies favoring the wealthy/corporations, and disproportionate impact on the poor…

Basically, all I’ve been able to identify as within my means is choosing to do without, and pay more for what I use/consume.

For example - meat. I heard just the other day that the production cost of meat far exceeds the transportation costs of plant goods. So that contributes to our decision to drastically reduce our meat intake.

Apologies for a rambling post. Yet another respect in which I feel we are not making choices - and not particularly hard choices - that would vastly improve things fr our kids/grandkids.

9

The problem is that neither the left nor the right are serious about fixing the problem.

The right won’t even acknowledge there’s a problem, and think scientists are engaged in a conspiracy. Total nonsense.

The left knows there’s a problem, but their solutions are bullshit for the most part, and they seem to be using environmentalism as a vehicle for enacting a political agenda. They don’t seem to be interested in solutions that won’t raise taxes on the “rich,” or infringe on freedoms. For proof, just look at their stance on nuclear energy.

We’re doomed.

10

I’m skeptical of efforts to combat carbon emission by reducing energy consumption. That’s mostly a guilt-reliever as long as the global population keeps rising and billions of dirt-poor people want more prosperous energy-intensive lifestyles. Really the only long-term solution is moving away from fossil fuel energy production. That will happen once the technology is there; wind and solar are less marginal than they once were for example.

11

Yeah.

The only way out of this is in a dramatic reduction in population which will serve to reduce consumption, production and waste. But if climate science is correct, it’s too late too late.

There is good news. Even if humanity doesn’t survive, the planet will go on without us.

12

Does the left have an official stance on nuclear energy? I’m a leftist and very pro-nuclear energy as part of the solution to our environmental woes. I know I’m not even close to being the only one – the majority of my peers share my political affiliation and stance on nuclear energy.

That said, I’m not against paying a bit more for a cleaner world, so tax me if you must. It’s a cost that should be shared by all, and thinking a solution could be found without some sacrifice from us is a bit fanciful. The main reason we have this problem is that dirty energy is cheap and suppliers want to maximize profits while consumers want to pay as little as possible, environment be damned.

13

Concur.

It’s disheartening to take what measures I can, to mitigate a measly couple of pints of water here and there.
Oops, don’t wanna waste this couple ounces of meat!

Then I go to work - nothing nefarious, just a damn chain restaurant - and see gallons upon gallons of clean, potable water literally go down the drain, and pounds upon pounds of meat wasted, because of poor training, bad communication, human accidents, etc.

14

Official? I don’t know. But it seems most of the people in the anti-nuclear crowd are far-left, politically.

15

No. Environmental parties have become more popular, their ideas and policies have become more mainstream, vague agreements have been made, influential mouthpieces like The Economist have been persuaded and some pension funds have been encouraged to pick other industries. Economic reforms have been made in some countries - some make more sense than others.

But this is different from progress, which is piecemeal.

16

Energy efficiency is just one part of a many things that should be done. But it is a legit part and has already helped.

17

The current Democratic senator of Arizona, Mark Kelly, won by also declaring that nuclear power is here to stay and should be used to deal with the issue, as a compliment to renewable energy. Nuclear power can be removed only until there is a time when renewables are deployed enough and ready to replace the need for nuclear.

18

This is the crux of the problem. Intergenerational compacts aren’t as respected as they used to be when things like Social Security and long term infrastructure projects were considered a worthy investment by people who wouldn’t live to benefit from them. We have become more and more selfish. The growing number of childless people have less stake in the future and those who do have children often seem to care little about the quality of life their descendants will have after they themselves are long gone.

19

There is an older contingent on the left that do make things hard to fight the problem. But their power and reach is tiny compared to Big Oil and coal and other concerns that have really fought change.

On the left, especially among the older hippy generation, Nuclear Power is a bogeyman and must be stopped. But of course plenty of Greens recognize that Nuclear Fission probably needs to be part of the answer to stop climate change.

“Hydroelectric is bad as it is harmful to fish and creatures that rely on fish.”
More realistically, many of us realize hydro should be on the table.

Some are against Wind due to bird kills, most of us support wind generation. Also the bird kill issues are reducing thankfully.

Some of the Hippy Generation of Greens, those that really started the movement want us to somehow just magically fix the problem, most of us, especially those that at least try to follow the science and statistics know that almost everything needs to be on the table.

I speak as someone that has been an active member of an Environmental groups whose roots are in the 60s and was started around 1974. Not being completely anti-nuke was a black mark, believe me.

But most of the problems by far are lobbyist for big polluting industries.

20

I concurr. While long term we can try to phase out nuclear, for the immidiate and medium term we should use and expand it as much as possible.