Topic: Climate Change Discussion Thread (perhaps the most important topic of our times)

@Definitely-Not-Leon
The 5 vs 10 t-shirts bit is what I meant by individual responsibility not being the solution. You can't force people to buy less short of making stuff more expensive. Which if targeted to emissions isn't a bad idea but it's something government would have to do. And they're generally unwilling

But technology? You can drive lower consumption through technology

Your example of flying across the world, technology allows remote work. And in addition to reduced consumption you're paying less and not having to waste time

Heating water? You could burn gas OR you could use a heat pump or solar hot water system. And swapping to the later would have the benefit of being cheaper in the long run

Transportation? You could burn petrol in a fuel guzzling tank OR you could go with an EV or public rail. And by going with the later you have the benefit of lower costs in the long run

Grid scale power? They could build more coal and gas fired plants OR they could invest in wind, solar, hydro, storage. The latter having the benefit of being cheaper in the long run (levelised cost including storage to cover variability renewables are cheaper)

All these things will happen because the tech will continue to improve changing the economic equation. The only thing stopping it are vested interests, luddites and the fact that the old infrastructure is in use and still working

So this thread has turned someone who were aggressively indifferent to being more somewhat motivated on the subject. That to me makes the thread a success.

@Definitely-Not-Leon Sure, I mean we, the people, can do something, but the media outlets desperately try to paint the picture of the people being at blame for it, so people won't go to those couple of companies and say "stop killing us", they will just sit divided, thinking that everyone else is the problem.

Same with china. Europe is desperately trying to stop everyone from destroying everything and on the other side of the wall, they are making the "let's see what happens when we pollute everything" challenge. But instead of shifting the attention to perpetrators, EU likes to point fingers at the few countries that have not yet transitioned from coal plants. Imagine the nerve, you destroy a country and when it gets back on the feet after 60 years with tremendous effort, you claim that they are not climate conscious because they were not financially able to support a transition you sponsored with the money and resources you stole from them.

Today I learned that the European Union, which was founded in 1993 (30 years ago), destroyed China 60 years ago

wut

@Pupuplatter

Dude what.

"instead of shifting the attention to perpetrators (CHINA), EU likes to point fingers at the few countries that have not yet transitioned from coal plants. (COUNTRIES OF EU)

@Princess_Lilly still don't understand what you're trying to say lol

what COUNTRIES OF EU did the EU destroy 60 years ago? what are you talking about?

I'm not going to weigh in with any opinions on the topic itself, because I have none really, but I'm just wondering why this thread was made on a video game forum. I get there's a ton of other threads that aren't entirely related to video games here, but they're usually for more general topics, and less inflammatory topics that are most likely just going to cause controversy. There's no politics thread on here, or at least I'm pretty sure there isn't, so I'm unsure why this is. Yes, I get the topic is important, but to the actual site itself, where most are here to discuss games and things outside of facing a cruel reality, I don't get why this is needed or allowed.

I assume what @Princess_Lilly was getting at was that the west in general has broadly benefited from industrialisation. Which came with substantial emissions. Something countries like China didn't really participate in to the same degree. Also the west hasn't really had an easy history with China. I mean the China as it exists today wasn't formally a part of the UN security council until 1971

In any case, the west in general has this head start and has been responsible for a large part of the additional CO2 in the atmosphere. Then we turn around and blame China for burning coal to boost up their middle class. The same China BTW who is responsible for much of the early investment into things like Solar PV which has created this rapid reduction in the cost of technologies

I mean, I'm not exactly a fan of China but I think there's merit to the argument that some will point to China as a scapegoat. Why are we doing things when China is burning more coal by the day? I mean obviously China should also move but, it's a bit rich for us to point to China when our tab is higher

@VoidofLight
To be blunt, I think people are a bit to precious. I don't have an issue with this topic existing, it's a worthwhile discussion to have. And frankly I don't see climate as a political discussion. It's a science and technology problem. If people want to make science and technology political? Well, that's on them

@skywake

I mean, the electronic device that you are posting from was at least partially manufactured in china. Every device we use on a daily basis is from China. They make all the stuff we buy. All those nintendo switch 2's aren't going to be made at nintendo HQ. They're gonna be made in china. Same as the switch you have now, the PS5, PS4, XBOX, all of them. Everything we buy. Made in china.

Those aren't "China's" emissions. Those are "our" emissions. They're just being generated at a different physical location. We didn't change our consumption, we just moved our factories.

@skywake My point was more of that it's a controversial topic that causes people to bicker between one another, akin to politics. I just don't think it has a place in a forum where the topic isn't related to real world issues.

On the topic of China, they have actually refused to take in plastic for recycling now because it’s such a scam and does more damage than good because of the need to melt and reduce rivers to a watery plastic mess. India have decided to fill in that gap now.

The concept of recycling plastic largely comes from chemical companies to shift blame from them to consumers because they knew the trouble it was gonna cause.

@VoidofLight Deju vu, if you have no interest in the topic you can always not post in the thread innit. The same way I see the various spammy meme or Final Fantasy threads and not post them.

This does reminder of what I said earlier in the thread of folk choosing to be actively ignorant on ridiculously important issues.

@Pupuplatter
Fair but the majority of emissions are not in industry. China's emissions, like most of the world, is mostly just function of their population. Commercial and residential energy usage, transportation, agriculture. That's half of global emissions. The other half? It's all sorts of stuff. Some of it we "offload" to China like the previously mentioned industrial usage. Other bits China does a lot of but again mostly for their own domestic consumption, like the production of cement and steel

In any case I think you misread me. What I was saying is that some people will point to China as an excuse to not do anything. And even though China is 1/3rd of global emissions I think that's a bit of a cop-out. Physics doesn't care about borders. But more to the point, if people want to do the "country blame game" we have to look at historical emissions. China is at the top for emissions right now. The US is on the top for cumulative emissions. Canada is the top for cumulative emissions per capita based on the current population. New Zealand is top for emissions per capita historically

When people point to China they ignore that:
1. The world existed before this year and
2. There are a LOT of people in China

@Pupuplatter Ever heard of Germany, the country that has been trying to force its way into becoming the leader of the EU for about a decade now? And now tries to shift the blame for everything to gain political leverage not only withing the EU but on the international arena?

@skywake formally, what people refer to as china, isn't even a country, and I am ever so glad that you have invoked the 1971. You mean my favorite resolution, 2578, October 25, 1971, a wrongly written resolution that has no legal impact for at least 2 reasons connected to international law. The power of representation has never been legally transferred from ROC to PRC. Saying that our tab is higher is actually pretty wrong. Take a look at statistical data and for how long china was emitting more CO2 than the whole EU (27 countries) combined. Saying that it's a scapegoat is, umm... an interesting concept.

@Princess_Lilly
Again, I'm no fan of China and I think you're probably aware enough about the subject that you can guess what I mean by that. So let me be very clear about what I specifically mean here. People generally point to China's vast emissions as an excuse to do nothing. That's not good enough. Physics doesn't respect borders, this is a global problem that requires global solutions. Which means everyone should be pulling the levers

As a side note I would point out that in terms of global cumulative emissions, including land clearing:
US: ~500bn tn
China: ~280bn tn
Russia: ~170
Brazil: ~110
Indonesia: ~100
Germany: ~90
India: ~80
UK: ~70
Japan, Canada: ~60bn tn each
France, Australia, Ukraine, Argentina, Mexico: ~40bn tn each

So if we're being pedantic, the EU probably has more. Certainly would've had more before Brexit. But more broadly the west is generally responsible for more. Again, not a fan of pointing fingers here. We should be pulling levers rather than crying in the corner that someone else is to blame. But even if I was in favour of pointing fingers I note how Australia is greater than 1/10th of China's emissions with less than 2% of the population..... those in glass houses and all that....

Not sure if you're responding to the correct post, because that does not clarify what you were talking about re: EU countries that were destroyed by the EU

Which EU countries did the EU destroy

@skywake Well, I for one am a fan pointing to China's vast emissions in order to raise awareness. That territory (honestly at this point we can't even say if it's ROC's territory anymore since they lay claims to Taiwan only lately, so it could be even said that legally - wise this is a no man's land) cannot be left alone. Humanity left china to its own devices and it led to one of the greatest threats to mankind, and I'm not only talking about the surprise they gave us in 2019-20 (it's pretty clear that it wasn't an "accidental" leak from their bioweapons lab), I'm talking about the nazi threat bigger than the 3rd Reich ever was.

"We should be pulling levers rather than crying in the corner that someone else is to blame." that is absolutely true, yet as you said, physics doesn't respect borders. Unless humanity as a whole decides to address the problems of china and ecology, , the situation will be like a cafe with 2 sides, the one where you are allowed to smoke, and the one where you are not.

@Pupuplatter I never said about EU destroying a country. 60 years counted from the the ending of WWII to full regeneration of countries affected, at about 2005). By Germany (and Russia, but they are not in EU). And after those 60 years, at 00s, they started undermining the positions of many countries to gain political power within the EU. Their clames were and are absolutely riddiculous, but they still make them. I hope it's obvious now, I didn't know it could be not obvious to someone earlier

@skywake Again, I really, really hope that technology will solve everything (eventually), and yes, I am also aware of all the technological advancements and insights that contribute to a better world (my brother and father have their own business in advising and engineering all the climate sytems inside buildings, and I am a parttimer there, so I am aware of all the new stuff going on, but I am also aware that we (as in the Netherlands, such as every rich country) use way more raw materials and energy than most of the world and at the same time already have a lot of problems with getting enough raw materials to build these systems and people to do the installation, let alone that the Netherlands is but a very small (though rich) country, so I can't imagine the problems we will face as the whole world is transitioning on our "standards..."

But at the same time (as I am in the proces of becoming a high school teacher in philosophy) I like to focus on attitude, behaviour, education, introspection/self-reflection and maybe I lean a bit to individual responsibility (though from a Cosmopolitan point of view), for I am highly interested in the Stoics (but with emotions) and the Existentialist, that is to put it bluntly in other words, focus on the stuff I can do myself and taking responsibility for that. So in my opinion and in line with your (positively interesting and hopeful) train of thought, technology could be the solution, but in the wrong hands (not only in really destructive ways but also when it is merely used as a commodification tool for profit or whatnot, which in my opinion is also destructive) is a huge part of the environmental problems we are facing nowadays. And I am not talking about merely behaviour of the individual, but about every possible role and institution in the world.

Just think about books/films as A Brave New World, 1984, The Matrix, The Star Diaries, Midnight Gospel, Rick & Morty, et cetera, but also every major war and at least I can't just focus or wait on technology alone, moreover technology (be it with a certain behaviour attached to it) is in my opinion one of the biggest instigators of the mess we are in right now. Yes, when you look at it from an cosmic distance it will all be part of the grand cycle of development (but I don't like Hegel's train of thought that it is all just thesis, antithesis and synthesis and that we are working towards the best possible world or Spinoza's idea that we are always already in the best possible world), but I live in the here and now, and I see and feel that as being born in the Netherlands I don't have to worry too much about primary good and services and I can live a comfortable life (be it that I might have more "mental" (as stemming from thoughts) issues than someone who is focusing on physically surviving), but that comes at a cost to others elsewhere in the world, and I don't like that thought, so I try to change my behaviour to at least do something. Do I just want to feel better? Maybe (but don't we all want to feel better from time to time), but so far (and I am working on this since starting high school, so 20-ish years ago) that is not working at all. Will it help what I do by myself? Probably not, at least not as long as the majority (such as companies, industries, other individuals, governments, et cetera just like @Princess_Lilly mentioned earlier, and my reason to join Milieu Defensie and become a collective of people that can compete with multinationals (we won the court case against Shell, which was the first ever in history that a collective of people won over a major multinational and it also led to changes from a governmental point of view)) is doing the opposite or doesn't know where to begin or just doesn't give a damn.

So again, I do think technology is important and it could be the solution. It is just that I am also aware that a lot of technology is used in a detrimental way and we as the world are too divided right now to really fight the environmental problems through technology alone (that's why I am really hopeful for stuff like nuclear fusion, such as ITER - where it seems that almost the whole world is working together to find a solution - though it will take a while before that project is finished). Besides that, I am just not a brilliant scientist who can contribute to the solution from a technological point of view but I hate to do nothing (even if it might not do a thing in the end), so I try to focus on what I can do and yes in Sartre's words that means that with my choices I choose how I see the world and how I think we as the people should act right now.

@Pupuplatter This is exactly why I try to change my behaviour and why I think it is important that people understand how well we have it here in our richer countries. Thanks for this comment .

@jump Nice focus on the positives and the constructive parts .

Fudge this is depressing. I find it bonkers you will have some folk who will happily spend their days ranting and raving over Star Wars and Marvel again and again but dead penguins aren’t worthy enough of a discussion to have.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/25/emperor-penguin...

@jump What are you talking about? Ranting about how the newest Star Wars shows has a women in it is a VERY important use of our time. (ugh)

@Definitely-Not-Leon A lot of people think technology is what got us into this mess but that's not true at all. We knew this was coming. We knew for decades. Technology advances doesn't automatically mean we had to pollute our planet until this point.
But people never felt that it was "the right time" to fully invest in technologies that could fix this issue. Because the world was arleady structured arround oil and gas and changing the status quo does not win elections so why bother?