this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2024
1269 points (97.5% liked)

Memes

45680 readers
2086 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A shorter version of my latest column

-Hayes Brown, Bluesky

Transcription / Alt Text:
Panel one: [off-screen] Fox News: Taylor Swift's plane is emitting soo much carbon Angry Goose: Why are carbon emissions bad? Panel 2: [Man labeled Fox News being chased] Goose: Explain why carbon emissions are bad, coward!!!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 59 points 9 months ago (39 children)

I hate Fox but they have a point. Preaching about climate change (good) doesn't excuse using a private jet (bad). And obviously the hypocricy makes it worse.

[–] [email protected] 63 points 9 months ago (30 children)

Greta Thunberg made the trip to the US for some climate summin via sailboat. Not to show that it can be done - but to show how absolutely impractical it is. Climate action cannot be about individual responsibility - sometimes we need private jets.

So the rational action would be to start a massive development effort to develop jets that are slower and run on hydrogen fuel cells or something. And find ways to generate hydrogen fuel without carbon. And then distribute and regulate jets.

But that's basically a planned economy, a taboo word to think or say in mainstream. Instead any small advancement is patented which raises the cost of it to maximize profit.

So no, pointing out Taylor's swift as hypocrite is not a good point, it is indeed propaganda to avoid sensible action on climate change. Of course it's way to late now so it doesn't really matter any more.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

State sponsored research is not a planned economy thing. Neither is climate regulation.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

We could design and plan a zero emissions civilization with a circular economy with today's technology. Practically it's absolutely impossible because it would be near 100% wealth redistribution.

Urban density would need to be increased, every home would need to be well insulated, homes would need to become smaller, home / work would need to be smaller meaning companies and living communities would have to be planned and forced to move, many small towns completely abandoned. Public transport, no more meat production, cars replaced with bicycles, smaller cars or 1 or 2 person robo taxies. Passenger airplanes would have to fly slower to save fuel. Massive amount of trains build. Hundreds of thousands of industrial processes would have to be redesigned, factories torn down and new ones build, patents would have to be abolished, no more large scale warships or bombers or jets, industrial production would need to be localized and moved from overseas to multiple smaller producers all around the world. Any of this goes far beyond regulations, and not even regulations are politically possible.

load more comments (28 replies)
load more comments (36 replies)