• silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    7 hours ago

    The sooner we act, the less drastic the measures needed are. That’s the reality of it, and something I’ll keep on pushing for.

    • eacapesamsara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      At this point we need to essentially end human habitatation of +/-10° from the equator, while eliminating coal, oil, and LNG energy use cases, while eliminating migration laws, while eliminating meat production, while investing tens of trillions into moving our farm capacity indoors and rewilding all previous agriculture sites, while inventing and utilizing an anti ocean acidification technology that doesn’t itself cause toxicity among marine life.

      And we need to some how conince 8 billion people of that during a time when 7.9…9 billion of them aren’t financially capable of changing anything in their life without becoming homeless or dying of starvation.

    • krashmo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      That’s not untrue but the problem with phrasing it that way is that people will interpret it to mean we can implement relatively unnoticed measures to mitigate climate change. That may have been true 50 years ago but it’s not anymore. Meaningful change will be very painful at this point and that’s exactly why it’s not going to happen until it’s literally impossible to ignore the problem. You would think we’re there already but humans are very good at maintaining delusional thinking.

      • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Hardly; it’s largely a matter of how quickly we phase out fossil fuels. Wait longer, and you get to scrap equipment before the ends of its normal useful life instead of getting full use out of what you pay for.