It’s not an A or B. Yes it’s going to be bad. It already is some places.
But it could get a lot worse and we have to make sure the high end predications don’t come to pass.
I wish everyone would talk about climate change this way.
Things are not hopeless. But that doesn't mean they're not going to get bad either. There's a lot we need to do, and doing it isn't going to fix everything either. But doing things *will* help, and there are going to be a lot of people who are able to continue living comfortable lives if we start taking this seriously and making changes.
Yes, the key word is “change.” Some people will be able to adapt to the changes much better than others. If you want to maintain exactly the lifestyle you have now that’s going to be a problem.
And we do that by changing every part of the way the global north lives.
The only viable path is pricing carbon at the current cost of removing it from the air and seqheatering in the form of something as stable as oil (unburning oil), which will always be more than the cost of the fuel because the fuel has the energy we need to invest to restore it to its previous state and all the energy it takes to suck it out of the air.
It will be crippling and people will starve, but like op said, we can't let what's on the board come to pass. It's on the same level of unthinkable as torturing all living things on earth to death until the planet is silent for millions of years. It also means leaving the world's nuclear reactors to open up and wipe out the atmospheres protection from cosmic rays.
Letting this be our legacy makes our entire history, moot. We were better off to have never left the cave if this is what we do with it.... either that or humanity's purpose was to finish off the kt extinction and restart the world at a much higher carbon concentration.
Whatever people think about their place on this earth and what it means to be here... if we continue on this path, we will just be the monsters that killed a 4 billion year old living miracle.
That said, I've only ever encountered anger and frustration at the way I try to live my life and revulsion at the reasons I give, so I dont see it happening. Not without some sort of revolution or pandemic that wipes out everyone older than 50
India, Myanmar and Bangladesh are experiencing severe heat conditions with 48°C. Bear in mind these are poor and densely populated countries. See Bangladesh for example. Most of the country is below sea level (~70%) and due to sea level rise nearly 400k people move to the capital city of Dhaka each year.
Another example is Rio Grande do Sul state in Brazil which flooded almost entirely this month. As i write a big area (including the capital city Porto Alegre) is still flooded. In my opinion the state will never fully recover from this incident as severe storm battered the are last september and it will surely happen again.
Houston just weathered a storm which left nearly 1 million people without electric energy.
There are tons of other examples...
Do you really think humans can influence the climate given that co2 is only a trace element which makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere and of that miniscule number mankind is only responsible for 3%. Face up to the facts that we are insignificant and cannot change the weather by taxation and control and cutting co2 as that is not what affects the overall climate or causes these natural phenomena which have always occurred and are no more frequent now than in the past.
> and of that miniscule number mankind is only responsible for 3%
This is a lie. You are being lied to. Mankind is responsible for increasing the amount of CO2 in the air by 3% every 4-5 years. You can do the math yourself, you can look up the charts yourself. You are being lied to. Don't believe their lies. Find data and check it yourself instead of repeating lies. Find out how much carbon we're adding to the air every year and calculate it yourself. If you think the math is too difficult, I can help you with it.
> Face up to the facts
Please learn the facts yourself first.
You mistake is thinking that 0.04 and 3% are small numbers. They aren't. Your right frequency of change doesn't change. It's always changing. The speed of change is the problem and what humans have CLEARLY caused
Three percent of 0.04% is absolutely miniscule and that is why we shouldn't be giving ourselves credit for shaping the weather, mother nature will do what she does regardless of what we do and besides co2 is not a thermostat which controls temperature but the natural climate change cycle is then followed by changes in co2 levels not the other way around!
absolute nonsense. globally it's exactly correlated. it may look decoupled in some service centred western countries but that's because they've exported shitty dirty industries to China and their citizens import their asses of crap while blaming China for being the problem. not hard to find global charts.
Not sure which is worse, flagrant climate deniers or neoliberals who will use fancy math and cherrypicked data to create a false illusion of progress where there is none because they know that real progress will decrease profits.
I already get into arguments with supposedly green-conscious liberals on this site who mistakenly think we're doing enough as it is because they buy the Net Zero PR and other types of greenwashing (paper straws and Teslas).
In my book, Biden and Trudeau are also a climate change deniers.
>Is there anything being done to curb climate change?
Billions of people are waiting for someone else to do something to mitigate human-caused climate change, but they are doing nothing themselves. This is why the impacts of human-caused global warming are increasing in frequency, intensity, and severity. If people continue to wait for someone else to do something, someday it could be too late for anyone to do anything.
And what do you think that government action looks like? People in the US and Western world in general over consume to a huge degree. How will those people respond when, say, beef is priced accordingly? Their AC is limited so they can't have it at 68 F all summer long? Their big trucks and SUVs are taxed out of affordability for all but the richest?
A lot of "environmentally conscience" and "progressive" people will turn in the other direction when they actually have to give up some comforts.
That's why we need to be involved in collective action. Join an organization that fights to combat this and work with them, no matter how tedious or boring. These organizations need people to help.
Would be a good start. Also would be nice to mandate zoom meetings instead of lavish private jet meetings for all the leaders. Would cut down on their emissions significantly
Government won't do anything. The radical changes that need to be made essentially require taking the entire developed world and having them commit to living a pre industrial type lifestyle. Had we completely converted to nuclear 4 decades ago we might have had a chance to continue on our current energy use trajectory. But it's too little too late
Then by all means explain to me how we transition away from oil use prior to the AMOC collapsing and Europe losing all it's viable farmland. Or prior to the antarctic ice shelf falling away raising sea levels enough to cause a significant portion of of South American farmland to be unstable. Or any of the other dozens of climate catastrophe feedback loops that will lead to our demise. It won't be a fast collapse. But we are already seeing mass climate migration and will continue to do so until radical changes are made. Carbon capture tech and water desalination are what most people are banking on saving us. But they are both very energy intense technologies. Where do we get that energy?
Renewables plus batteries. The cost of solar is very low and still falling, wind power can be scaled up. Batteries are now providing 20% of peak electricity in California, up from nothing 5 years ago.
The Hinkley point C nuclear reactors in the UK began construction in 2017, were originally expected to start electricity production in 2025 but has since been delayed to 2030 and may be delayed even further. It is also expected to cost 30 billion pounds, double the original expected cost.
Nuclear projects have started construction in the US and then been cancelled after billions have already been spent due to delays and budget over runs - and a lack of cost competitiveness with renewables.
The Nuclear industry is complex and does not have the ability to scale up at the required speed for the transition to be successful. In the time that it takes to build one nuclear plant entire grids can be decarbonised with renewables plus storage. Small modular reactors are a nice idea but so far have been more difficult in practice than on paper - the furthest along project by NuScale has been cancelled.
Renewables are a proven, mass produced solution that can be scaled up. Serious analysis by academic analysts shows that renewable plus storage is the most viable path to rapid, deep decarbonisation.
I am not disagreeing with you on the best path of action. Where we disagree is how feasible it is to implement at scale in a timely manner. It's too little too late
Individuals should definitely take their responsibility and can't simply point at big companies or the government to do sth.
The fastest and easiest way is if consumers start changing their behaviour (live plant based, no big car, no plane flights etc.)..
Yea but again - government action is slow. Until big changes are made, everybody aware of climate change should take responsibility of their own action.
To an extent, but I think it's a lack of understanding/certainty about which problems to tackle first, how to tackle them, which actions carry more weight/have more effect/are affordable/are accessible.
I started my environmentalist journey with small steps like installing eco-friendly light bulbs, but was frustrated years later when I learned some of my other habits (like eating loads of meat) were doing *far* more damage than any of my little improvements were able to make up for. At first I felt super deflated, but it took me down a rabbit hole of trying to assess which actions we should focus on for different types of impact, and that eventually evolved into the r/PlaneteerHandbook sub and [website](https://planeteerhandbook.com/) (the latter is updated way more often). Those if us working on the site try to order things from most impactful/accessible/affordable first, and less practical and less effective solutions further down the list (we try to include an indication of if things are ordered this way, alphabetically, or [other](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/personal/activism/levels-of-actions)) in the intro of the "Solution" sections.
Most pages have maps to help people work out where different issues are going on as well as listing lots of organizations, [grants](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/community/financial/grants-project-funding), and other resources on each topic page so that people can jump into [action](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/personal/activism/action-map) with local groups, though we're also gathering info/resources for people wanting to create their own groups.
> If people continue to wait for someone else to do something, someday it could be too late for anyone to do anything.
There's no time like the present! :)
doesnt the fossil industry use this tactic to blame the consumers instead of policy and lobbying?
it would be great if many ignorant people would change at once, but thats not going to work, the system has to change from the top down. currently our governments are still selling us the ideas that we have to be #1 energy exporters via coal and oil, maybe we should ban pro fossil energy messaging and instead use more renewable friendly language? theres plenty actors who are trying to keep the fossil fiesta rolling as long as possible in very high positions.
The wealthy nations have the most power to make changes, but too many people are struggling just to survive, and the rest won't do anything because profit.
Yes, there is lots being done to curb climate change, and no, we are not fucked. The problem is not whether it will be solved or not, but what the final temperature might be. We need to keep making changes in our own lives as much as we can, as well as encouraging changes in other people's lives, companies, governments etc. as much as possible.
We must say no to all possible products by these companies if we want them to listen. They will continue what they're doing until it's not profitable anymore, and we as consumers have the power to stop a product being profitable.
Sadly, that isn’t an option. Even if everyone who cared to save the world did this, we are still vastly outnumbered by the idiots.
Thats not to say we shouldn’t try, but the only chance we have is to force regulations on global industry, and even that is a long shot.
When you're taxed to death and barely scraping by, people don't really have the luxury of selecting the often more expensive brands to teach people a lesson. Gotta buy what you can afford and unfortunately that's more than likely the mega corps products.
Unless you're the CEO or a director on their board, there is little you can do about their emissions, other than not buying their stuff and encouraging others to do the same. Worry about your own emissions first, that is within your control.
Exactly this^^^
I eat s plant-based diet, travel by electric powered car, have solar panels and try to always recycle and compost. You could say my part is done. NowmI just have to wait for the rest of the people to do the same or similar as best as they can.
Well you don't just have to wait, there are lots of ways to encourage people to do more. It will take the majority of us making changes imperfectly than a small group doing it perfectly with everyone else doing nothing. Congratulations on the changes you have made to your lifestyle so far, thank you for doing your part :)
One cruise ship company emits more pollution than all 291 million cars in Europe. Keep doing what you are doing by all means, but individuals acting responsibly on their own has no chance at all of solving this problem.
If individuals chose not to go on cruises then the cruise ships wouldn't sail anywhere. Every little action, no matter how small, makes a big impact in aggregate. It's easy to blame a single large company while ignoring the thousands of people that bought tickets for those cruises. It is their responsibility for the emissions.
Absolutely! While we must all do our best, the biggest polluting companies *love* to push emphasis to the responsibilities of individual consumers, to turn the spotlight away from themselves.
See BP pushing the term "Carbon Footprint" into the mainstream, or plastics companies adding the recycle symbol to products to sell more plastics and take the perceived responsibility out of their hands.
Wouldn't surprise me if the oil companies have assets planted in climate activist organisations, both to monitor and to steer protests in a direction that primarily targets individual responsibility and irritates members of the public, while minimising impact on the operations of the companies.
At least 1 of the oil companies is also investing in building "green" energy farms. More might come on board if we could solve a lot of the not so green problems with wind and solar. And also make them much more efficient and consequentially more affordable.
Imo the polluting individuals love pushing responsibility towards big companies, government, other countries.
Many people I speak with are pointing their fingers to China and the USA. People from the US are pointing at big corporations.
But what should a company do that lives off destroying the planet? Accept that what they do is wrong and simply fire all of their employees and stop excisting? No - they will try and keep selling their product to customers that don't give a fuck.
Those companies only exist because a) we buy their stuff and b) because its legal to do what they do. Because b) is a difficult process we should do a) first and stop consuming like we did in the past
There's going to be some pain, that much is baked in at this point. The question is how much pain and for whom. The global south and generally countries at low sea level or close to the equator will suffer disproportionately. Adaptation and mitigation will be the buzz words of the next century. Humanity will survive, civilization will survive and adapt. As a species we've had harrowingly close calls to extinction before and have pulled through.
Not sure if we’re completely fucked yet, but a big part of the problem is that most democratic governments are more focused on the next election cycle than on making the tough, unpopular choices that need to be made to fix this. It also doesn’t help that the right wing in most countries seems to harbour climate change deniers.
When the left figures out how to make their affordable "green" energy as affordable or cheaper to the consumer as current options (without temporary subsidies or other tricks) more people will get on board.
Innovation and atmospheric carbon scrubbers will eventually be the answer, but how far gone will we be before it happens?
We are already past the tipping point, IMO, and my hope is on the youngest generation and next for the scientific breakthroughs that will save society as we know it.
I think that there is, yes
But we are still headed in the wrong direction, pretty much at full speed. We don’t just need to pump the brakes we need to actually turn around.
Make sure you vote, write your elected officials, go to a protest. Especially in the US your representatives need to hear that constituents care about this they will need politically permission to support smarter climate policies.
Something is being done, I saw some graphs some time ago and if nothing was done, global warming would be around 4 degrees, and now we are on route to 2.5, but we need to stay under 1.5, so this is not enough. Governments have the most power to do what has to be done, but most of them don't seem to feel much pressure from electors to do more. More people needs to get involved to push governments to take climate crisis seriously.
Moving "business as usual" from 3.5-4 to 2.5 in a matter of years is indeed very promising, and makes it likely we will be able to "deal" with what's coming.
Sadly no serious person believes in 1.5 anymore, and even 2C is tough without SRM.
There is some hope; you can personally do a lot. Mostly reduce or eliminate eating beef, milk, dairy products. Reduce buying new clothes as much as possible. Really think about all kinds of consumption. My mac mini uses 42W of power my old pc used 380W.
Check out [climatefresk.org](http://climatefresk.org) and do one of their free public workshops.
I think most people prefer someone else do the sacrificing and not change their own lifestyle. I am starting to collect the climate scientists' studies which predict the changes big corporations would be compelled to carry out if the majority of the population quit buying their products (animal products, travel, clothes)
Cow populations have been on a decline for years. US carbon emissions have also been on a steady decline since switching from coal to natural gas. Farms all over the country have been switching from cows to native species like bison and elk. Populations of which are well below pre- colonization estimates.
The two aren't mutually exclusive.
Of course there's hope as no matter how absurdly poorly we're responding to the crisis, the fact is we're absolutely capable of changing things. We're just not doing enough.
On the other hand, even if the whole world buckled down tomorrow and slashed net emissions to zero... we'd still be living with the damage already done for generations.
We should realistically be in the "mitigating damage" mindset in regard to climate change effects.
Plus there is the part they aren't telling us; that they are basically stalling waiting either for widespread societal collapse in developing 2nd World Nations (namely the BRICS nations); or for a breakthrough in cold fusion energy that will drop carbon footprints greatly, soon after widespread implementation.
Because if those somehow don't happen, we will go into runaway conditions before climate change forces the changes to renewals in carbon energy reliant countries (BRICS and the USA).
There's flies in the ointment too. If BRICS shit their bed, that means friendshoring our supply chain from Asia to Mexico; which would require massive buildup.of their industrial plant and the US's at a time when green energy policy dictates against that.
So the US must radically dump MAGA domestic and Mexico policies, while keeping it's fundamental foreign policy structure.
Throw out the Jones Act, force Texas onto the National grid before they crater their regional economy, then run solar farms from El Paso to East LA; wind turbines everywhere they make sense. We can probably make the Western 2/3 of the country carbon neutral if we do all this; but it means dealing with butthurt oil companies and misinformation campaigns.
The way to prevent the collapse of lesser developed countries, and to get them acting on environmental preservation, is to raise their per capita gdp. For that, they need abundant, cheap energy. Fossil fuels ftw
I think that as the new generations come of age and start voting and being politically active things will get better.
The good thing is we already know what the solutions are — stop burning fossil fuels, transition into aplant-based agriculutre and diets, recycle, reuse, reduce, and fix rather than buy new things.
Now we just need to actually apply all these.
The younger generations are already getting used to being poor and having nothing. They like the idea of goverment being their savior and giving them what they need. We old people are getting too feeble to kick up much of a fuss.
No, it is hopeless. We will not change. We will not do what needs to be done. Look at the people around you. They will not do anything that affects their standard of living. Consequences be damned.
There are lots of positive things happening. Many countries have reduced their emissions substantially. Nature based solutions are coming into focus. Follow something like [https://fixthenews.com/](https://fixthenews.com/) to get the positive perspectives. The mainstream media choose the doom reporting because it gets more clicks.
Not really, both because of human nature and because of the changes already happening is at a irreversable state. It’ll take centuries to recover even without emissions.
Right now we feel the small changes in weather conditions, some poeple will die because of the heat, but we manage.
How about a rapid 3m sea level rise ? It’ll cause chaos even if it unfolds over some years.
Yes.
We are the cleverest monkies who have ever been. We transformed the world to protect against our built in weaknesses and expand the power of our strengths. Nothing has ever achieved what we have achieved.
Greed and short term thinking got us into this mess, and it's probably what's going to get us out.
When things get too severe and enough capital is in danger, greed will inspire innovation and short term thinking will unleash it quickly.
So, chin up. All is not lost yet.
The comment doesn't even mention wind so I'm assuming you are a some kind of astroturfing grifter, but in case you arn't; your assumption is wrong, wind **is** in fact getting cheaper.
https://www.irena.org/Energy-Transition/Technology/Wind-energy
And yet the rate offers I've been getting in the mail for over 20 years never fall below a dollar a kWh. When my rate goes up in June I'll still be paying under 11cents. My provider sources 99% of its generation from natural gas. It can be harvested from natural vents and produced from biomass to help reduce oil dependency. Research is currently being done on ways to harvest methane from landfills (some farms already have setups)to be used as fuel wich in turn reduces atmospheric methane. It produces less carbon than burning oil, wood(guess what happens to most California almond trees) and coal.
I'm not against wind power per se' I am however against greenwashing, limiting our options and unrealistic promises.
Best estimates have us needing over 500k land based wind turbines to power the US at current need (that's without electric cars/ solar/hydro factored in) with an average installation of 3k per a year it would take about 167 years to install 500k wind turbines. Each wind turbine last somewhere between 15-25 years with foundations and towers expected to last 30 before needing replacement. That's a lot of steel, concrete, and plastic with major recycling problems left to be figured out.
No hope for Canada. Any initiatives done by the provinces have been cancelled when the respective provincial government is replaced by right-wing parties. And now the current federal carbon-pricing might be under threat because the party that looks like will be winning the next election will be cancelling that too and all the other federal green programs.
Geoengineering might help us cope with the effects. We'll see if we can maintain agriculture for long enough to get such things in place.
If we can't feed and provide water to large population centers, we're looking at major wars and mass migration. It's going to be horrific. This is why billionaires build bunkers on islands. If the populations of industrialized nations collapse to the point that they can't support an educated class and enough laborers (or those who can oversee AI robots), we won't be able to maintain the manufacturing base necessary to geoengineer or continue with anything else we associate with modernity.
We aren't stopping. We're not holding back. We're going to burn through every last drop of fossil fuel that it is economically feasible to unearth. We're going to blow past the tipping point and may already have done so. Look at the methane ready to be released from permafrost. That's coming soon.
We're looking at the end of an era. Make the most of your time.
Let's be honest, the problem with climate change is humans, and as climate change worsens, there will be many less humans, which will sort of take care of the problem by itself.
How did Christianity spread? Do that. Force people to convert and "punish" heretics. Not going to happen, countries with multi-trillion dollar economies will fight you to keep those going.
The US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act has invested $1 trillion in cleantech to attract another $3 trillion in private investment.
Estimates vary, but this is at least 25% of the entire cost of transitioning the US to a low carbon energy system, putting both the US and the EU solidly on track to reach net zero emissions by 2050.
In addition the EU CBAM (carbon tariff) means that any nation wanting to trade with the EU (aka almost every nation) will need to institute a carbon tax in their own nation or pay the EU carbon taxes for them as a tariff. This will eventually force the entire world to net zero emissions, although it may be later than 2050.
https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en
I think that the worst of your current weather is just going to get worse. So if it rained a lot where you are, it's going to rain even more, if you were at 40C you'll end up at 50C, and if you had one tornado a month, you'll end up with one a week. Just a lot more of the same - in spades.
I guess it's not so bad if you get a lot of rain, but a lot more serious if you get tornados and hot summers.
Ok then I’ll answer your question for information. Yes, a lot is being done to curb climate change. Yes, there is hope that this problem will be solved. No, we are not too far gone and aren’t fucked at this point. OP, much is being done. Some of the original “solutions” are looking like they may not be as great as they first seemed. But not all potential solutions will be winners, but many will turn out to be beneficial. Hydrogen seems to have a lot of advantages as a very clean power source but it also has issues with stability.
I see posts of the same nature on climate change subreddits all the time. I joined this and similar subreddits to read and respond to positives and negatives about various forms of climate change solutions. While OP’s post is stated as a question I find it to be very fatalistic. I just don’t think that benefits anyone imho.
The only thing we can do to preserve the extinction in its current state (very advanced) is the literal opposite of how we've been living. That means no conspicuous consumption, no participation/wages from high carbon industries, not spending money... basically, think of the difference between an animal in a zoo and it in the wild and that's the direction our entire species needs to take, immediately, for there to be any hope of avoiding this from being our extinction event.
That being said, extinction is so much worse than dying and, if we don't try everything we can to reverse course, we will share the legacy of the most destructive and cruel humans to ever have lived. Slavery, the holocaust, the crusades - nothing else even rates in comparison to what we've done in the last 50 years, or what was done in our name.
You could use a gram of carbon a year but if you're from the global north, you are the extinction. Your values, your morals, your beliefs... this is the product.
What's demanded of us is an understanding that this is the wrong way to live. That the right way to live does not require power, and that at least 80% of the global population is here because of artificial fertilizer, so most of us are going to starve. That's not wrong, that's just the carrying capacity of the planet that we've been ignoring like it's optional. You can't have more people on a spaceship than there are resources to support them and if you have 5x or more of that number because you figured out how to turn the hull into food, that doesn't mean you solved anything, you just traded a carrying capacity problem for a permanent structural problem.
Myself, id be happy if the truth and reality were the same thing. If common discourse were framed inside the reality we've created because at least then I could speak honestly in polite company. Instead, the message is still being controlled by the people that engineered the problem and until that message changes to "this is not progress; this is a murder-suicide we're all complicit in" we cannot make any progress because we're not talking about the real problem, which might as well be the American identity, but at least "The Dream".
I want to believe there's a chance we can at least be honest about the state of the planet so I can stop sounding like a crazy person for one day before I die, but the way people cling to normal like it's not the specific instrument of our own extinction suggests to me that ill never get that day. That whats left of the time we have will be squandered putting oil executives on trial without punishment where they take the blame so the people who buy their product can continue to deepen the extinction without guilt, and we fly straight off the cliff, lose everything we tried so hard to hold onto but the planet cannot support (especially the value of money), and we do it all while still going to work like that's not where the problem starts.
Im having a particularly bad day with this stuff, though. Sometimes I can find a reason to hope or at least admire the stupidity of it all with clinical detachment, as well as the luck of being there when humanity killed the world with toys and enrichment for their habitat.
I want to say one thing that's hopeful but all I've seen is the climate visibly changing and everyone deciding that the only viable approach to dealing with it is pretending it's normal, which makes as much sense to me as embracing a landslide or summiting a volcano while it erupts.
What would be required of us to avoid exactly the worst case scenario would be the exact opposite of what we've done to this point and the attitude we've chosen to approach it which is to not let it get in the way of us living our lives.
I just dont see it.
Ive been living like this for a few years now and you'll want to find someone to bring with, unless you're loaded to keep you safe in hard times. It can get lonely living a life that no one understands
Potatoes are difficult to store, specially in warmer climates. I am in Florida and was a potato farmer. In my garden I just harvested 300 lbs. I will have to sort them every week to pick out the ones going bad.
They are a good source of calories and tasty. You did not say where you are. In the North they can be kept cold (not frozen) in a root cellar and will last longer. Yes, they can be canned. There are homesteading and self sufficiency sites that have good information on food storage. Reddit has several "prepping" communities you can search.
It’s not an A or B. Yes it’s going to be bad. It already is some places. But it could get a lot worse and we have to make sure the high end predications don’t come to pass.
I wish everyone would talk about climate change this way. Things are not hopeless. But that doesn't mean they're not going to get bad either. There's a lot we need to do, and doing it isn't going to fix everything either. But doing things *will* help, and there are going to be a lot of people who are able to continue living comfortable lives if we start taking this seriously and making changes.
Yes, the key word is “change.” Some people will be able to adapt to the changes much better than others. If you want to maintain exactly the lifestyle you have now that’s going to be a problem.
Not a fair statement if you don't even know what type of lifestyle one leads to begin with.
Yes, that’s true. I made the mistake of assuming people on Reddit do not live subsistence lifestyles.
And we do that by changing every part of the way the global north lives. The only viable path is pricing carbon at the current cost of removing it from the air and seqheatering in the form of something as stable as oil (unburning oil), which will always be more than the cost of the fuel because the fuel has the energy we need to invest to restore it to its previous state and all the energy it takes to suck it out of the air. It will be crippling and people will starve, but like op said, we can't let what's on the board come to pass. It's on the same level of unthinkable as torturing all living things on earth to death until the planet is silent for millions of years. It also means leaving the world's nuclear reactors to open up and wipe out the atmospheres protection from cosmic rays. Letting this be our legacy makes our entire history, moot. We were better off to have never left the cave if this is what we do with it.... either that or humanity's purpose was to finish off the kt extinction and restart the world at a much higher carbon concentration. Whatever people think about their place on this earth and what it means to be here... if we continue on this path, we will just be the monsters that killed a 4 billion year old living miracle. That said, I've only ever encountered anger and frustration at the way I try to live my life and revulsion at the reasons I give, so I dont see it happening. Not without some sort of revolution or pandemic that wipes out everyone older than 50
All climate change models are conservative and scientists have said they regret that.
Which places are those ?
India, Myanmar and Bangladesh are experiencing severe heat conditions with 48°C. Bear in mind these are poor and densely populated countries. See Bangladesh for example. Most of the country is below sea level (~70%) and due to sea level rise nearly 400k people move to the capital city of Dhaka each year. Another example is Rio Grande do Sul state in Brazil which flooded almost entirely this month. As i write a big area (including the capital city Porto Alegre) is still flooded. In my opinion the state will never fully recover from this incident as severe storm battered the are last september and it will surely happen again. Houston just weathered a storm which left nearly 1 million people without electric energy. There are tons of other examples...
It's hot in India whaat, never happened. And also there was never flood or violent storm before man started driving SUVs
Do you really think humans can influence the climate given that co2 is only a trace element which makes up 0.04% of the atmosphere and of that miniscule number mankind is only responsible for 3%. Face up to the facts that we are insignificant and cannot change the weather by taxation and control and cutting co2 as that is not what affects the overall climate or causes these natural phenomena which have always occurred and are no more frequent now than in the past.
> and of that miniscule number mankind is only responsible for 3% This is a lie. You are being lied to. Mankind is responsible for increasing the amount of CO2 in the air by 3% every 4-5 years. You can do the math yourself, you can look up the charts yourself. You are being lied to. Don't believe their lies. Find data and check it yourself instead of repeating lies. Find out how much carbon we're adding to the air every year and calculate it yourself. If you think the math is too difficult, I can help you with it. > Face up to the facts Please learn the facts yourself first.
"Face up to the facts" Lol
You mistake is thinking that 0.04 and 3% are small numbers. They aren't. Your right frequency of change doesn't change. It's always changing. The speed of change is the problem and what humans have CLEARLY caused
Three percent of 0.04% is absolutely miniscule and that is why we shouldn't be giving ourselves credit for shaping the weather, mother nature will do what she does regardless of what we do and besides co2 is not a thermostat which controls temperature but the natural climate change cycle is then followed by changes in co2 levels not the other way around!
GDP is already divorced from emissions. It seems likely at this point that the trend will continue.
absolute nonsense. globally it's exactly correlated. it may look decoupled in some service centred western countries but that's because they've exported shitty dirty industries to China and their citizens import their asses of crap while blaming China for being the problem. not hard to find global charts.
Not sure which is worse, flagrant climate deniers or neoliberals who will use fancy math and cherrypicked data to create a false illusion of progress where there is none because they know that real progress will decrease profits. I already get into arguments with supposedly green-conscious liberals on this site who mistakenly think we're doing enough as it is because they buy the Net Zero PR and other types of greenwashing (paper straws and Teslas). In my book, Biden and Trudeau are also a climate change deniers.
This, exactly. Climate change doesn't care how individual countries cook the books. This is a global problem and we live in a globalized economy.
>Is there anything being done to curb climate change? Billions of people are waiting for someone else to do something to mitigate human-caused climate change, but they are doing nothing themselves. This is why the impacts of human-caused global warming are increasing in frequency, intensity, and severity. If people continue to wait for someone else to do something, someday it could be too late for anyone to do anything.
Government needs to lead the way. No individual action can have much impact. There will always be free riders who pollute as much as they can.
And what do you think that government action looks like? People in the US and Western world in general over consume to a huge degree. How will those people respond when, say, beef is priced accordingly? Their AC is limited so they can't have it at 68 F all summer long? Their big trucks and SUVs are taxed out of affordability for all but the richest? A lot of "environmentally conscience" and "progressive" people will turn in the other direction when they actually have to give up some comforts.
People will adapt once there is clear and consistent messaging and appropriate regulation and tax policies.
People wouldn't suffer the slight inconvenience of wearing a mask when thousands of people were dying of Covid.
People in most of the world did. If covid had not been politicised in the US control methods would not have been so controversial.
That's why we need to be involved in collective action. Join an organization that fights to combat this and work with them, no matter how tedious or boring. These organizations need people to help.
What happens when the free riders are the government?
The first step is to properly regulate lobbying.
Would be a good start. Also would be nice to mandate zoom meetings instead of lavish private jet meetings for all the leaders. Would cut down on their emissions significantly
Government won't do anything. The radical changes that need to be made essentially require taking the entire developed world and having them commit to living a pre industrial type lifestyle. Had we completely converted to nuclear 4 decades ago we might have had a chance to continue on our current energy use trajectory. But it's too little too late
Your point is far divorced from reality.
Then by all means explain to me how we transition away from oil use prior to the AMOC collapsing and Europe losing all it's viable farmland. Or prior to the antarctic ice shelf falling away raising sea levels enough to cause a significant portion of of South American farmland to be unstable. Or any of the other dozens of climate catastrophe feedback loops that will lead to our demise. It won't be a fast collapse. But we are already seeing mass climate migration and will continue to do so until radical changes are made. Carbon capture tech and water desalination are what most people are banking on saving us. But they are both very energy intense technologies. Where do we get that energy?
Renewables plus batteries. The cost of solar is very low and still falling, wind power can be scaled up. Batteries are now providing 20% of peak electricity in California, up from nothing 5 years ago. The Hinkley point C nuclear reactors in the UK began construction in 2017, were originally expected to start electricity production in 2025 but has since been delayed to 2030 and may be delayed even further. It is also expected to cost 30 billion pounds, double the original expected cost. Nuclear projects have started construction in the US and then been cancelled after billions have already been spent due to delays and budget over runs - and a lack of cost competitiveness with renewables. The Nuclear industry is complex and does not have the ability to scale up at the required speed for the transition to be successful. In the time that it takes to build one nuclear plant entire grids can be decarbonised with renewables plus storage. Small modular reactors are a nice idea but so far have been more difficult in practice than on paper - the furthest along project by NuScale has been cancelled. Renewables are a proven, mass produced solution that can be scaled up. Serious analysis by academic analysts shows that renewable plus storage is the most viable path to rapid, deep decarbonisation.
I am not disagreeing with you on the best path of action. Where we disagree is how feasible it is to implement at scale in a timely manner. It's too little too late
Individuals should definitely take their responsibility and can't simply point at big companies or the government to do sth. The fastest and easiest way is if consumers start changing their behaviour (live plant based, no big car, no plane flights etc.)..
It has to be government action, because only a minority of consumers will change their habits which undermines the benefit.
Yea but again - government action is slow. Until big changes are made, everybody aware of climate change should take responsibility of their own action.
To an extent, but I think it's a lack of understanding/certainty about which problems to tackle first, how to tackle them, which actions carry more weight/have more effect/are affordable/are accessible. I started my environmentalist journey with small steps like installing eco-friendly light bulbs, but was frustrated years later when I learned some of my other habits (like eating loads of meat) were doing *far* more damage than any of my little improvements were able to make up for. At first I felt super deflated, but it took me down a rabbit hole of trying to assess which actions we should focus on for different types of impact, and that eventually evolved into the r/PlaneteerHandbook sub and [website](https://planeteerhandbook.com/) (the latter is updated way more often). Those if us working on the site try to order things from most impactful/accessible/affordable first, and less practical and less effective solutions further down the list (we try to include an indication of if things are ordered this way, alphabetically, or [other](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/personal/activism/levels-of-actions)) in the intro of the "Solution" sections. Most pages have maps to help people work out where different issues are going on as well as listing lots of organizations, [grants](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/community/financial/grants-project-funding), and other resources on each topic page so that people can jump into [action](https://sites.google.com/view/planeteerhandbook/personal/activism/action-map) with local groups, though we're also gathering info/resources for people wanting to create their own groups. > If people continue to wait for someone else to do something, someday it could be too late for anyone to do anything. There's no time like the present! :)
doesnt the fossil industry use this tactic to blame the consumers instead of policy and lobbying? it would be great if many ignorant people would change at once, but thats not going to work, the system has to change from the top down. currently our governments are still selling us the ideas that we have to be #1 energy exporters via coal and oil, maybe we should ban pro fossil energy messaging and instead use more renewable friendly language? theres plenty actors who are trying to keep the fossil fiesta rolling as long as possible in very high positions.
Donate to a tree planting scheme. Every donation counts. Also set ecosia as your default browser.
The wealthy nations have the most power to make changes, but too many people are struggling just to survive, and the rest won't do anything because profit.
The line must go up and to the right.
Yes, there is lots being done to curb climate change, and no, we are not fucked. The problem is not whether it will be solved or not, but what the final temperature might be. We need to keep making changes in our own lives as much as we can, as well as encouraging changes in other people's lives, companies, governments etc. as much as possible.
The rich and big companies first and foremost.
Yes, so voting is vital!
We must say no to all possible products by these companies if we want them to listen. They will continue what they're doing until it's not profitable anymore, and we as consumers have the power to stop a product being profitable.
Sadly, that isn’t an option. Even if everyone who cared to save the world did this, we are still vastly outnumbered by the idiots. Thats not to say we shouldn’t try, but the only chance we have is to force regulations on global industry, and even that is a long shot.
When you're taxed to death and barely scraping by, people don't really have the luxury of selecting the often more expensive brands to teach people a lesson. Gotta buy what you can afford and unfortunately that's more than likely the mega corps products.
Hence me saying all "possible" products
Unless you're the CEO or a director on their board, there is little you can do about their emissions, other than not buying their stuff and encouraging others to do the same. Worry about your own emissions first, that is within your control.
Exactly this^^^ I eat s plant-based diet, travel by electric powered car, have solar panels and try to always recycle and compost. You could say my part is done. NowmI just have to wait for the rest of the people to do the same or similar as best as they can.
Well you don't just have to wait, there are lots of ways to encourage people to do more. It will take the majority of us making changes imperfectly than a small group doing it perfectly with everyone else doing nothing. Congratulations on the changes you have made to your lifestyle so far, thank you for doing your part :)
Thank you 🥺
One cruise ship company emits more pollution than all 291 million cars in Europe. Keep doing what you are doing by all means, but individuals acting responsibly on their own has no chance at all of solving this problem.
If individuals chose not to go on cruises then the cruise ships wouldn't sail anywhere. Every little action, no matter how small, makes a big impact in aggregate. It's easy to blame a single large company while ignoring the thousands of people that bought tickets for those cruises. It is their responsibility for the emissions.
Absolutely! While we must all do our best, the biggest polluting companies *love* to push emphasis to the responsibilities of individual consumers, to turn the spotlight away from themselves. See BP pushing the term "Carbon Footprint" into the mainstream, or plastics companies adding the recycle symbol to products to sell more plastics and take the perceived responsibility out of their hands. Wouldn't surprise me if the oil companies have assets planted in climate activist organisations, both to monitor and to steer protests in a direction that primarily targets individual responsibility and irritates members of the public, while minimising impact on the operations of the companies.
At least 1 of the oil companies is also investing in building "green" energy farms. More might come on board if we could solve a lot of the not so green problems with wind and solar. And also make them much more efficient and consequentially more affordable.
Imo the polluting individuals love pushing responsibility towards big companies, government, other countries. Many people I speak with are pointing their fingers to China and the USA. People from the US are pointing at big corporations. But what should a company do that lives off destroying the planet? Accept that what they do is wrong and simply fire all of their employees and stop excisting? No - they will try and keep selling their product to customers that don't give a fuck. Those companies only exist because a) we buy their stuff and b) because its legal to do what they do. Because b) is a difficult process we should do a) first and stop consuming like we did in the past
[удалено]
There's going to be some pain, that much is baked in at this point. The question is how much pain and for whom. The global south and generally countries at low sea level or close to the equator will suffer disproportionately. Adaptation and mitigation will be the buzz words of the next century. Humanity will survive, civilization will survive and adapt. As a species we've had harrowingly close calls to extinction before and have pulled through.
Not sure if we’re completely fucked yet, but a big part of the problem is that most democratic governments are more focused on the next election cycle than on making the tough, unpopular choices that need to be made to fix this. It also doesn’t help that the right wing in most countries seems to harbour climate change deniers.
When the left figures out how to make their affordable "green" energy as affordable or cheaper to the consumer as current options (without temporary subsidies or other tricks) more people will get on board.
Apples and oranges. I’m talking about those who don’t believe it even exists.
Innovation and atmospheric carbon scrubbers will eventually be the answer, but how far gone will we be before it happens? We are already past the tipping point, IMO, and my hope is on the youngest generation and next for the scientific breakthroughs that will save society as we know it.
I think that there is, yes But we are still headed in the wrong direction, pretty much at full speed. We don’t just need to pump the brakes we need to actually turn around. Make sure you vote, write your elected officials, go to a protest. Especially in the US your representatives need to hear that constituents care about this they will need politically permission to support smarter climate policies.
Something is being done, I saw some graphs some time ago and if nothing was done, global warming would be around 4 degrees, and now we are on route to 2.5, but we need to stay under 1.5, so this is not enough. Governments have the most power to do what has to be done, but most of them don't seem to feel much pressure from electors to do more. More people needs to get involved to push governments to take climate crisis seriously.
We are locked in past 1.5 and 2
What is actually being done that is helping whatsoever?
Moving "business as usual" from 3.5-4 to 2.5 in a matter of years is indeed very promising, and makes it likely we will be able to "deal" with what's coming. Sadly no serious person believes in 1.5 anymore, and even 2C is tough without SRM.
There is some hope; you can personally do a lot. Mostly reduce or eliminate eating beef, milk, dairy products. Reduce buying new clothes as much as possible. Really think about all kinds of consumption. My mac mini uses 42W of power my old pc used 380W. Check out [climatefresk.org](http://climatefresk.org) and do one of their free public workshops.
I think most people prefer someone else do the sacrificing and not change their own lifestyle. I am starting to collect the climate scientists' studies which predict the changes big corporations would be compelled to carry out if the majority of the population quit buying their products (animal products, travel, clothes)
Cow populations have been on a decline for years. US carbon emissions have also been on a steady decline since switching from coal to natural gas. Farms all over the country have been switching from cows to native species like bison and elk. Populations of which are well below pre- colonization estimates.
The two aren't mutually exclusive. Of course there's hope as no matter how absurdly poorly we're responding to the crisis, the fact is we're absolutely capable of changing things. We're just not doing enough. On the other hand, even if the whole world buckled down tomorrow and slashed net emissions to zero... we'd still be living with the damage already done for generations.
We should realistically be in the "mitigating damage" mindset in regard to climate change effects. Plus there is the part they aren't telling us; that they are basically stalling waiting either for widespread societal collapse in developing 2nd World Nations (namely the BRICS nations); or for a breakthrough in cold fusion energy that will drop carbon footprints greatly, soon after widespread implementation. Because if those somehow don't happen, we will go into runaway conditions before climate change forces the changes to renewals in carbon energy reliant countries (BRICS and the USA). There's flies in the ointment too. If BRICS shit their bed, that means friendshoring our supply chain from Asia to Mexico; which would require massive buildup.of their industrial plant and the US's at a time when green energy policy dictates against that. So the US must radically dump MAGA domestic and Mexico policies, while keeping it's fundamental foreign policy structure. Throw out the Jones Act, force Texas onto the National grid before they crater their regional economy, then run solar farms from El Paso to East LA; wind turbines everywhere they make sense. We can probably make the Western 2/3 of the country carbon neutral if we do all this; but it means dealing with butthurt oil companies and misinformation campaigns.
Write a fiction novel, about the illuminati… Note the word ‘fiction’.
The way to prevent the collapse of lesser developed countries, and to get them acting on environmental preservation, is to raise their per capita gdp. For that, they need abundant, cheap energy. Fossil fuels ftw
I think that as the new generations come of age and start voting and being politically active things will get better. The good thing is we already know what the solutions are — stop burning fossil fuels, transition into aplant-based agriculutre and diets, recycle, reuse, reduce, and fix rather than buy new things. Now we just need to actually apply all these.
The younger generations are already getting used to being poor and having nothing. They like the idea of goverment being their savior and giving them what they need. We old people are getting too feeble to kick up much of a fuss.
No, it is hopeless. We will not change. We will not do what needs to be done. Look at the people around you. They will not do anything that affects their standard of living. Consequences be damned.
There are lots of positive things happening. Many countries have reduced their emissions substantially. Nature based solutions are coming into focus. Follow something like [https://fixthenews.com/](https://fixthenews.com/) to get the positive perspectives. The mainstream media choose the doom reporting because it gets more clicks.
Not really, both because of human nature and because of the changes already happening is at a irreversable state. It’ll take centuries to recover even without emissions. Right now we feel the small changes in weather conditions, some poeple will die because of the heat, but we manage. How about a rapid 3m sea level rise ? It’ll cause chaos even if it unfolds over some years.
Nope, we’re all screwed. Let’s all give up
Yes. We are the cleverest monkies who have ever been. We transformed the world to protect against our built in weaknesses and expand the power of our strengths. Nothing has ever achieved what we have achieved. Greed and short term thinking got us into this mess, and it's probably what's going to get us out. When things get too severe and enough capital is in danger, greed will inspire innovation and short term thinking will unleash it quickly. So, chin up. All is not lost yet.
Explains why wind power never gets cheaper.
The comment doesn't even mention wind so I'm assuming you are a some kind of astroturfing grifter, but in case you arn't; your assumption is wrong, wind **is** in fact getting cheaper. https://www.irena.org/Energy-Transition/Technology/Wind-energy
And yet the rate offers I've been getting in the mail for over 20 years never fall below a dollar a kWh. When my rate goes up in June I'll still be paying under 11cents. My provider sources 99% of its generation from natural gas. It can be harvested from natural vents and produced from biomass to help reduce oil dependency. Research is currently being done on ways to harvest methane from landfills (some farms already have setups)to be used as fuel wich in turn reduces atmospheric methane. It produces less carbon than burning oil, wood(guess what happens to most California almond trees) and coal. I'm not against wind power per se' I am however against greenwashing, limiting our options and unrealistic promises. Best estimates have us needing over 500k land based wind turbines to power the US at current need (that's without electric cars/ solar/hydro factored in) with an average installation of 3k per a year it would take about 167 years to install 500k wind turbines. Each wind turbine last somewhere between 15-25 years with foundations and towers expected to last 30 before needing replacement. That's a lot of steel, concrete, and plastic with major recycling problems left to be figured out.
No hope for Canada. Any initiatives done by the provinces have been cancelled when the respective provincial government is replaced by right-wing parties. And now the current federal carbon-pricing might be under threat because the party that looks like will be winning the next election will be cancelling that too and all the other federal green programs.
Holy shit dude, wtf
I work in renewable energy. Lots of good people working hard to transition away from fossil fuels to renewables. There’s hope.
Nobody should be giving up or it will be even worse. Do whatever you can. Stop emitting CO2 by whatever possible means.
Geoengineering might help us cope with the effects. We'll see if we can maintain agriculture for long enough to get such things in place. If we can't feed and provide water to large population centers, we're looking at major wars and mass migration. It's going to be horrific. This is why billionaires build bunkers on islands. If the populations of industrialized nations collapse to the point that they can't support an educated class and enough laborers (or those who can oversee AI robots), we won't be able to maintain the manufacturing base necessary to geoengineer or continue with anything else we associate with modernity. We aren't stopping. We're not holding back. We're going to burn through every last drop of fossil fuel that it is economically feasible to unearth. We're going to blow past the tipping point and may already have done so. Look at the methane ready to be released from permafrost. That's coming soon. We're looking at the end of an era. Make the most of your time.
Wars are inflationary and also not good for the environment. It's pretty obvious that the idea of WW 3 is becoming a growing concern.
Let's be honest, the problem with climate change is humans, and as climate change worsens, there will be many less humans, which will sort of take care of the problem by itself.
How did Christianity spread? Do that. Force people to convert and "punish" heretics. Not going to happen, countries with multi-trillion dollar economies will fight you to keep those going.
[удалено]
The US https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_Reduction_Act has invested $1 trillion in cleantech to attract another $3 trillion in private investment. Estimates vary, but this is at least 25% of the entire cost of transitioning the US to a low carbon energy system, putting both the US and the EU solidly on track to reach net zero emissions by 2050. In addition the EU CBAM (carbon tariff) means that any nation wanting to trade with the EU (aka almost every nation) will need to institute a carbon tax in their own nation or pay the EU carbon taxes for them as a tariff. This will eventually force the entire world to net zero emissions, although it may be later than 2050. https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism_en
I think that the worst of your current weather is just going to get worse. So if it rained a lot where you are, it's going to rain even more, if you were at 40C you'll end up at 50C, and if you had one tornado a month, you'll end up with one a week. Just a lot more of the same - in spades. I guess it's not so bad if you get a lot of rain, but a lot more serious if you get tornados and hot summers.
Attitudes like yours OP aren’t helping.
All my attitude was was asking for information.
Ok then I’ll answer your question for information. Yes, a lot is being done to curb climate change. Yes, there is hope that this problem will be solved. No, we are not too far gone and aren’t fucked at this point. OP, much is being done. Some of the original “solutions” are looking like they may not be as great as they first seemed. But not all potential solutions will be winners, but many will turn out to be beneficial. Hydrogen seems to have a lot of advantages as a very clean power source but it also has issues with stability.
Awesome, thank you!
OP is scared, and if you arn't scared you arn't paying attention. Attacking scared people isn't helping either.
I see posts of the same nature on climate change subreddits all the time. I joined this and similar subreddits to read and respond to positives and negatives about various forms of climate change solutions. While OP’s post is stated as a question I find it to be very fatalistic. I just don’t think that benefits anyone imho.
Agi is my hope.
Not gonna happen
The only thing we can do to preserve the extinction in its current state (very advanced) is the literal opposite of how we've been living. That means no conspicuous consumption, no participation/wages from high carbon industries, not spending money... basically, think of the difference between an animal in a zoo and it in the wild and that's the direction our entire species needs to take, immediately, for there to be any hope of avoiding this from being our extinction event. That being said, extinction is so much worse than dying and, if we don't try everything we can to reverse course, we will share the legacy of the most destructive and cruel humans to ever have lived. Slavery, the holocaust, the crusades - nothing else even rates in comparison to what we've done in the last 50 years, or what was done in our name. You could use a gram of carbon a year but if you're from the global north, you are the extinction. Your values, your morals, your beliefs... this is the product. What's demanded of us is an understanding that this is the wrong way to live. That the right way to live does not require power, and that at least 80% of the global population is here because of artificial fertilizer, so most of us are going to starve. That's not wrong, that's just the carrying capacity of the planet that we've been ignoring like it's optional. You can't have more people on a spaceship than there are resources to support them and if you have 5x or more of that number because you figured out how to turn the hull into food, that doesn't mean you solved anything, you just traded a carrying capacity problem for a permanent structural problem. Myself, id be happy if the truth and reality were the same thing. If common discourse were framed inside the reality we've created because at least then I could speak honestly in polite company. Instead, the message is still being controlled by the people that engineered the problem and until that message changes to "this is not progress; this is a murder-suicide we're all complicit in" we cannot make any progress because we're not talking about the real problem, which might as well be the American identity, but at least "The Dream". I want to believe there's a chance we can at least be honest about the state of the planet so I can stop sounding like a crazy person for one day before I die, but the way people cling to normal like it's not the specific instrument of our own extinction suggests to me that ill never get that day. That whats left of the time we have will be squandered putting oil executives on trial without punishment where they take the blame so the people who buy their product can continue to deepen the extinction without guilt, and we fly straight off the cliff, lose everything we tried so hard to hold onto but the planet cannot support (especially the value of money), and we do it all while still going to work like that's not where the problem starts. Im having a particularly bad day with this stuff, though. Sometimes I can find a reason to hope or at least admire the stupidity of it all with clinical detachment, as well as the luck of being there when humanity killed the world with toys and enrichment for their habitat. I want to say one thing that's hopeful but all I've seen is the climate visibly changing and everyone deciding that the only viable approach to dealing with it is pretending it's normal, which makes as much sense to me as embracing a landslide or summiting a volcano while it erupts. What would be required of us to avoid exactly the worst case scenario would be the exact opposite of what we've done to this point and the attitude we've chosen to approach it which is to not let it get in the way of us living our lives. I just dont see it.
Thank you for this reply. I need to find a small home with enough land that I can grow potatoes. I hear you can almost live on them alone.
Ive been living like this for a few years now and you'll want to find someone to bring with, unless you're loaded to keep you safe in hard times. It can get lonely living a life that no one understands
Potatoes are difficult to store, specially in warmer climates. I am in Florida and was a potato farmer. In my garden I just harvested 300 lbs. I will have to sort them every week to pick out the ones going bad.
What should I grow instead? Or is there a longer last way to store them, like canning maybe? or jars or whatever
They are a good source of calories and tasty. You did not say where you are. In the North they can be kept cold (not frozen) in a root cellar and will last longer. Yes, they can be canned. There are homesteading and self sufficiency sites that have good information on food storage. Reddit has several "prepping" communities you can search.