this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024
252 points (100.0% liked)

Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.

6322 readers
368 users here now

Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.

As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades: Graph of temperature as observed with significant warming, and simulated without added greenhouse gases and other anthropogentic changes, which shows no significant warming

How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world: IPCC AR6 Figure 2 - Thee bar charts: first chart: how much each gas has warmed the world.  About 1C of total warming.  Second chart:  about 1.5C of total warming from well-mixed greenhouse gases, offset by 0.4C of cooling from aerosols and negligible influence from changes to solar output, volcanoes, and internal variability.  Third chart: about 1.25C of warming from CO2, 0.5C from methane, and a bunch more in small quantities from other gases.  About 0.5C of cooling with large error bars from SO2.

Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:

Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 38 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 33 points 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (10 children)

Is this a vegan org? It doesn't mention anything about their members adhering to a plant-based diet, and it would certainly make me uncomfortable if they weren't.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Adhering to dogmatic ideas of ideological purity is detrimental to the environmentalist cause.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Along with what others have said, you’re also falling for the oil industry’s years long campaign to heave onto us the responsibility to fix the mess they created, knew about, covered up, and gaslighted everyone on.

A group is having a real impact on the people and companies that are 85%-95% responsible for the mess we’re in…and you question the climate group? Like…that’s such weirdly unnecessary bootlicking. You probably don’t realize you’re doing it—or maybe you do, I dunno. But this is the same tactic used every single time a reporter is trying to discredit a spokesperson for any climate action group—the shitty conservative reporters too, like Pierce Morgan.

So…you’re not in good company.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

You can find other orgs that fight against climate change who promote veganism within their organization and to the general population. Greenpeace, for example. Hell, even Greta Thunberg, who's had more of an impact than these other guys, is vegan.

The idea is to "be the change", and you can't be telling one group (i.e. the fossil fuel industry) to stop doing what they are doing, while acting in ways that demonstrably harm the environment needlessly.

A plant-based diet, perhaps above all else, is one of the most powerful tools we have to fight climate change. And once you convince one person to go vegan, they will likely change their lifestyle beyond diet to reduce their carbon footprint and rely less on the fossil fuel industry.

The industry won't go anywhere if they still have 8 billion customers. As individuals, our day-to-day lives impact their bottom line; we can make them money, or we can prevent them from making money.

I don't discredit their efforts, but their credibility. It would go a long way if their members showed that they were serious about climate change in their own lives, while fighting against the industry.

Anyway, I just asked the question, since I don't know this group. Perhaps they are all vegans, and they go after the livestock industry, too.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, of course it’s always good. No one is denying that.

But my point is the context. Following an article about a climate group that is seeing positive results in hounding the fuck out of some of the assholes responsible, your reaction actually runs cover for the assholes. See what I’m saying?

“Average citizen foils a home robbery as he’s walking by with his dog.”

You: “pfft. But does he volunteer his time to help those people starving in his city?”

Like, what the fuck? Yes, we all know it’s good to cut out what you can—it’s better to ride a bike than drive a car. It’s better to eat less meat than meat all the time. It’s better to be vegetarian than eat meat. It’s better to be vegan than vegetarian. But to say if you’re not doing ALL OF THE ABOVE, FUCK YOU doesn’t help anyone but the people truly responsible for the climate crisis. It’s turning your attention away from those who output megatonnes carbon into the atmosphere and who literally engineered the term “carbon footprint” to shift blame and focus away from them (which you have picked up the torch on, which is my point) and onto us, the people who don’t put out in a year what one of these companies is responsible for in a day or a week.

Again, you’re not wrong, it’s great to do what you personally can, but in this context, you’re not proving that point. You’re saying, “oh yeah, well what’s your carbon footprint?! Did you make those signs out of recycled paper? Did you drive here to make this climate change denier face their crimes?!” For that, you kinda suck in this context. No offense.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

and it would certainly make me uncomfortable if they weren't.

I was going to be very mean to you, then I took a deep breath and realized that it wasn't worth it.

I would invite you to realize that for every 10 articles detailing how bad climate change is, there are maybe 1 of these articles. Tell me, what exactly are you doing by poking holes here? This organization has the potential to create far more lasting change than you being vegan ever will. What do you gain by pointing this out?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

While going vegan is a good thing for the environment, not everyone can or is willing to switch completely. You can reduce your meat intake and eating more plant based foods without going full vegan.

Don't let perfect be the enemy of good enough, especially at an individual level.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I mean if you feel better you do it, but actual actions regarding the climate would be laws that force the industry to act on their emissions.

Which in return will make meat more expensive and therefore people will eat less.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

Pretty much yeah, individual actions are important but meaningless if not followed by government regulation.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

While going vegan is a good thing for the environment

It's quite literally one of the most impactful things you can do as an individual.

not everyone can or is willing to switch completely.

99.99% of people can, but an org that's fighting to end climate change really should have that be their minimum for members.

Greenpeace, for example, promotes veganism all the time. I'd trust them more than these other guys.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Perfect is the enemy of good enough, the goal should be for everyone to reduce their footprint, and we shouldn't be splitting hair and arguing that everyone should go vegan. That's unrealistic.
At the scale of a country if we get 90% of the people to reduce their red meat and dairy intake by 60% it would be a massive win already.

Roughly 15% of the world population has IBS which means a much larger number than 0.1% cannot go vegan (I'm one of them). I try my best to reduce my food footprint but there's only so much I can do.

Also by your reasoning you can't be a member of an organisation fighting against climate change if you're not vegan, that's a great way to drive people away from the cause...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The article is about fighting oil and gas and you bring up veganism and state that if they're not vegans they aren't truly fighting for the cause?? Defeating oil and gas would be a great thing for the world and being vegan has nothing to do with any of it. But way to keep your eye on the prize Showroom. They certainly can't lobby to make the world a better place if they eat chicken nuggets from time to time. The Audacity of these people.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Oh noes, that organization that really makes an impact in bettering the world doesn't support my particular pet peeve, they suck!

It's this attitude why most grass roots organisations fail. As soon as a group gains some traction, you have all these.peoplemlike you immediately trying to inject their issues in there. I remember this happening to occupy Wall Street, that started good, then it toren itself apart when they needed to add all the other issues, racism, lgbtqfjwkskgr, Womens rights, animal rights, and so on... Meanwhile the coke sniffing assholes were laughing at them from a high balcony with champagne in their claws I shit you not.

How about you just tell them: well done, please do some more! Can I help you with your cause? Maybe one day we'll look at my particular cause, but that can wait a day.

Your behavior is the reason why we can't have nice things, please stop it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Do you do CrossFit too?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

They're not really trying to change minds, they're just crashing fossil fuel parties. We'll have to see if they crash meat industry parties too. I doubt it.

It's pretty common for people to fail at understanding systemic problems, unfortunately. We'll see what other groups do after this one fails and disbands.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

You want people crashing meat industry parties? Get your friends to join you and do exactly that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

I use Arch btw

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

One of the biggest things you can do to dilute your message as a group, especially a small group, is to choose too many targets. As you said elsewhere, Greenpeace is already promoting veganism, as is PETA and a number of other groups. These guys don't need to jump on that bandwagon to get the message out. Let them focus on what they're doing, which also needs to be done. Otherwise, all you're doing is redirecting criticism from the bad actors to the people trying to make them stop.