r/ClimateOffensive I downloaded Bill Gates’ new book, “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster '' on Audible and I can’t wait to listen to it. I’ve been reading the reviews, not all good (MIT Review slammed it for “climate solutionism”). But frankly, I’m looking for some hope on this issue, so I'm going to listen anyway.
The urgency of the climate crisis is now far too big to ignore. But realistically only fixing the climate crisis will not guarantee us a healthy or habitable planet. It could leave us with a carbon-neutral dystopia unless we pull forward the environmental ethic that is the foundation of action.
That's why we have to make certain that "climate" activism remains tied to its roots in "environmental" activism.
I was a kid when Nixon started the EPA, and when Jimmy Carter first started the push for fuel-efficiency. In the 60s and 70s, it seemed like we had gotten the message. It inspired me to become an environmental journalist in my early career where I was witness to the growth of the environmental backlash and the start of 40-years of steadily marching backward on the environment.
If the 60s and 70s had seen an environmental revolution, we’ve since been living through the counter-revolution, culminating in the Trump administration’s utter contempt for the environment.
Now it seems we are back on track. Climate science has new tailwinds and Biden seems willing to do something. But we could conceivably fix the climate crisis, only to find ourselves still hurtling toward a barely habitable planet, with nasty and brutish conditions, massive food and energy shortages, plagued by repeated pandemics. The climate crisis clearly makes all of our environmental problems much worse, but we cannot mistake climate as the root cause.
For example, we could fix the climate crisis and yet continue to deplete topsoil at alarming rates, inducing widespread famine. Even if we stop the earth from warming, the build-up of toxic chemicals in our water, air, soil, and food could continue unabated. Net-zero carbon emissions will not save our environmentally sensitive lands from falling prey to development (the Everglades, the Amazon). Even in a zero-carbon world, we could continue to trash our oceans, and degrade our farmland and food sources. Sustainable farming can contribute to the climate solution, but a “carbon-neutral” pesticide is still a pesticide.
Our built environment could be both energy-efficient and hellish if we don’t focus on sustainable comm... keep reading on reddit ➡
I've been lurking on this community for months. I'm fascinated by the Hilaria Baldwin scandal, largely because I'm
tired of exhausted with two specific types of "influencers": 1.) Those who capitalize on other people's insecurities in order to peddle lifestyle products (I suppose this is every influencer, really). 2.) Mom influencers/bloggers who don't extend *any* empathy or make any effort to understand (or at least acknowledge) the experiences of people like me who struggle with fertility and/or can't have children. When she was called out not only for lying but for lacking empathy,* it felt cathartic and satisfying and yes, even validating.
Anyway, I ended up following Hilaria on IG because I'm a big SNL fan. She quickly irritated me even more than most "influencers" because on top of boasting about her lifestyle, her elitist mommy-ness, and her normatively "fit" body by plastering it all over social media, she launched her whole "living clearly" schtick to posture herself as humble and sustainable. As part of her "brand" as a yoga and fitness "guru," sure, but also to shut down criticism about the excesses that she shows off on social media all the time. The hypocrisy and gaslighting involved here made me feel sick and I unfollowed her. Even the bra that she wears in instagram photos looks like it sells for enough to erase national student loan debt. Yet she could go on Wendy Williams and claim that she was just living simply, "living clearly."
I also think that she launched her "living clearly" schtick to ward off criticism over the unsustainability and large carbon footprint of having so many (privileged) kids. In that YouTube video where she "packs lunches" for her kids, she postures a lot about vegetarianism. She mentions that her kids "love" tofu. I initially thought that she was only humble-bragging about their healthy lifestyle... but I think there's more going on here. I also interpreted her video about "not wasting food" through her "sustainability" act. She can counter valid criticism over the Baldwinini...? BaldDorito...? Baldwinito! wealth and excess (multiple houses, diamonds, publicists, red carpet gowns, staff, a herd of kids) by playing up the angle: "look at me, I don't waste bananas or apples, I make them into bread with my kid, aren't we just thrifty and saving the planet?" I also think that she deploys the sustainability act because it makes it harder to criticize her for her exclusions of people navigating i... keep reading on reddit ➡
I’ve been working as a hydrogeologist in environmental consulting for three years at a mid-sized firm in the Midwest (US), and I have a growing distaste for the industry. Like many people, I became a geoscientist largely because I’m passionate about sustainability, conservation, and protection of land and water resources for future generations. As a student, I thought my dream job would be working on remediation projects but my time in industry has proven otherwise.
When I actually get to work on cleanup projects, it typically feels like my company has about half the budget and time needed to do good work. Conceptual site model development, options assessments, and feasibility studies usually get crunched together into one mega exercise. The end result on most projects is a rushed remedial solution that I’m highly doubtful will work for more than five years, if at all.
More than half of the time, I get stuck arguing for de minimis conditions or monitored natural attenuation as a remedial solution (with maybe ~10% of sites actually meeting those criteria imo). From a moral/ethical standpoint, these exercises just feel wrong and I’ve started to dread my workday.
In talking with mid- and senior-level staff at my company, it seems like many people are former idealistic environmentalists that have since swapped for a more pragmatic approach. When your job is to “solve your clients problems”, protecting the environment seems to become a secondary concern.
Maybe I’m too stubborn/idealistic to let go of my environmental leanings, maybe I’m naive to doubt remedial activities that more experienced staff have signed off on, or maybe folks are just doing the best they can within the regulatory framework that currently exists. However, I’m left feeling feeling burned out, unsatisfied, and unsure of where I should take my career. So I’m partially venting into the Reddit void, with a few questions for any fellow environmental professionals:
For environmental consultants: are there any companies out there that successfully meet client demands and protect/conserve natural resources, or do those two goals often/always contrast to a degree?
For non-consultants: do you work in a geoscience/environmental position that is also fulfilling as an environmentalist?
I am not an Objectivist however I'm wondering what the belief system surrounding the environment is. The biggest reason I do not identify with the libertarian right is because I believe that it is not as equipped to handle environmental problems, but I am open to hearing how I may be wrong.
I've been having stomach issues for the past 2 years that all cascaded from laxative abuse from an eating disorder and moving away for college. I went from my grandmother making me organic homemade from scratch meals every night to dining hall food.
I developed ulcers. I went through hell every day, and many days I still wake up vomiting. No, it isn't pregnancy. A year later and they couldn't ever figure out what was wrong. I gave up on going to the doctor, they never had any answers for me.
On top of that complicating my diet, I just developed lactose intolerance. Really, I think I have actually had it for the past three years given the symptoms are the same as what I've been dealing with post-ulcers.
Im in a crisis. I've tried going plant based back in high school a few times with the goal of switching to a vegetarian diet. But having that my grandmother shopped and cooked and is very meat and potatoes, its hard. Once I got to college and dealt with the ulcer stuff, I just stopped caring because I just wanted to find anything I could eat. And the only other barrier was just, cheese. But I know they have plant based faux cheese now.
So I'm taking this environmentalism class. Of course my professor is vegan, I scoffed when joining the class. But I genuinely care about the topic. So she made us do this assignment where we track our intake and output trashwise for the week. She had a lifelong pork farmer come in and speak. She had us calculate and write about our carbon footprints. And honestly, it's fucking horrifying.
I don't drive. I carpool when I can, use public transit. I recycle, had a vegetable garden and composted when I had the land to do so. Nameless other little things we can do to reduce consumption. It would still take 4 1/2 Earths for everyone to live like I do. And the worst part; no one person can make it under 1 Earth. Thats just the cost of all the factors in our system.
Meat though? Meat is a huge, huge part of your carbon footprint, I learned. Probably one of the biggest things you can do to cut down your footprint, really. And now I can't stop thinking about it every time I heat up dinner from one of those unrecognizably processed frozen meals. The texture has changed. I think about it when I chew. As I swallow. The chicken or cow it may have come from. What conditions they must live in to give me and countless other people small cubes of their flesh. And I don't need this to live.
And it's hard. I love animals; my first major wa... keep reading on reddit ➡
Some of you may know that despite the successes of the socialist system in the Soviet Union, environmental concerns often fell behind comparative to many other nations, for example with 50% of Russia's water supply falling below safety standards due to Soviet-era chemical dumping. Does the CPRF have a plan to rectify this environmental damage and reduce the country's reliance on fossil fuels, or have they published any materials on the issue?
Would the LVT help the environment and halt deforestation or just cause a surge in prices for products that use the deforestation facilities to compensate for the new tax. Will the world be if it or will the monopolistic companies push the debts onto consumers like they do now?
Also, why not do more to help retrain the miners (and the oil and gas workers) including relocation, redevelop and transition their economies, give severance packages to older workers (or a negative income tax can help support an economy in some poorer, rural areas).
And promote nuclear power, it's a radioactive issue, but perhaps it's better than what people perceive the GOP now with climate change and the environment, some younger conservatives seem to be pushed for the Republicans to take a greener direction.
So I've been a part of the Warhammer fandom for a relatively short amount of time, only about 6 or so months, and the entirety of my engagement with the franchise has been through the video games and books. I'm loving everything I see, and I've recently become more interested in playing on tabletop. I've become okay-ish from playing on tabletop simulator, and I think building the models and playing IRL would be a lot of fun. However, I just can't get past the fact that it would involve me consuming massive amounts of small plastic parts and paints and are toxic to animals and plants that will inevitably end up leaking into the soil in a landfill. I feel like I would be sacrificing my principles and become a (more) active contributor to climate change and pollution, and that such small plastic parts would be the worst manifestation of that and embody the overconsumption and carelessness that has gotten the world into this situation to begin with.
Sorry if this is kind of a rant or not the content this sub is looking for, I would just like some advice on how you folks seem to do it.
The Farengi were used to demonstrate the foibles of capitalism but I feel like the star trek completely missed the boat I'm demonstrating one of the biggest issues with capitalism, which is that it's completely horrific for the environment. In little green men quark exclaims in shock "they irradiated their own planet?" In reaction to the testing of atomic bombs, but this flies in the face everything Farengi. Unrestricted resource exploitation would have been just as destructive to Farenginar as nuclear war. The idea that they would for some reason consider their own planet sacred and protect just seems bizarre. I really wish it turned out that Farenginar was not their original planet because they had completely destroyed their original world. Does anyone else feel like this was a huge missed opportunity?
Since I've been introduced to the concept of wild animal suffering, it seems obvious to me veganism and environmentalism are at odds. Environmentalists want to rewild and improve biodiversity to:
- prevent ecosystem collapses
- reduce the risk of diseases jumping between hosts (probably the biggest risk facing humanity)
- slow down global warming due to tree planting and growth.
However, this obviously increases wild animal suffering by several orders of magnitude.
How do you all reconcile this given that rewilding efforts (if they are to help with climate action and ecosystem collapse) would happen in the next few decades, at a time where we don't understand how ecosystems work to a detailed enough level to not reintroduce predators?
so this might be a really stupid question but i know many environmental solutions can’t really happen under capitalism. so with communism or some sort of communist society, how would that be fixed? like how would workers owning the means of production of a coal mine change the fact that it’s burning carbon based fuel/ it’s a coal mine and further polluting the earth? please don’t attack but thanks in advance :/
Why all the back and forth across the world? It makes no sense if green is truly such a big motivator. We of course know F1, as all sports, is rife with hypocrisy so it's foolish to think this is some sort of 'gotcha' moment. But for entertainment's sake I made up a schedule anyway. I say realistic because if I was going for just a purely fantasy schedule it'd only be about 14 races, only at tracks we want to see. If any sort of compromise between what fans want and with the FIA/Liberty wants was to be had, this or something similar would be what I expect as realistic.
This article is just plain stupid.
The authors propose moving some portion of the population out of the "urban sprawl" of economically productive Malé, one of the most densely populated cities in the world, (23k p/km² | 59k p/mi²) where one can walk to anywhere in the city in 30 minutes or less, to the poorer outlying rural islands.
They propose shifting the country's economy to "ecotourism," without explaining how said ecotourism could actually be environmentally friendly when the only feasible way to get to the Maldives is by plane.
Furthermore, they indulge in the fantasy that the Maldives could be fully self-sufficient and sustainable in the provision of all their needs, not realizing that in the modern world, nowhere on the planet is truly self-sufficient, and that it is especially infeasible in a country with such a low ratio of land to population, and even more infeasible with their proposed economic model of tourism.
They also disagree with the proposal to build a seawall around the island, seemingly preferring the slow destruction and climate devastation of a developing nation to seeing some concrete as if they have less concern for the lives of actual citizens than green aesthetics. They fail to realize that a place can't be sustainable if doesn't exist anymore.
Overall, this an article in support of sprawl, and against all the things they claim to desire.
Edit. Sorry about the asterisks. I thought it would italicize the publication name.