Global warming: Are we doomed? A poll.

[The Grand Nudger]

Yeah - I get what you are saying, but do you honestly believe that solving any of these other problems comes without cost, energy, focus and need for resource? I am not saying the problems are mutually exclusive. 

That's exactly what you said, and why I responded, because it's a depressingly common objection to climate action in my experience, and simply false.  OFC it's not free, solving any problem has a cost, but solving the climate problem doesn't have to make people poor or hungry.  We already spend the money to solve those problems, we just haven't.. traditionally, selected the most efficient or productive solutions.  For example..we've been spending about 20 billion a year subsidizing oil as a solution.  Will addressing climate change be costly?  Yes..and there's 20 billion to start doing it..right there.  

What I am saying is that we are a bunch of loosely coupled global societies and by way of example, are you really going to enthuse a country that is, say, contributing only 0.1% of the world's emissions and is struggling from one or more of the other issues above into committing the resources, engaging in the change management and short term cost and tradeoffs to achieve their emission reduction goals enthusiastically?

A country that's not contributing to global warming in any meaningful way doesn't have reduction goals to meet..but can they enrich themselves by plugging into other countries reduction schemes?  Yes, yes they can.  In fact, many of those countries have never had an opportunity like this in all of their existence.

Or a country whose economy and wealth (looking at you, Australia) is based on production of fossil fuels would suffer disproportionately in the short-medium term if they were to abandon their primary industry altogether? Are you saying that they would not experience tradeoffs?

Take a look at any hallowed out coal town in the us.  I'm surrounded by them.  That's the eventual fate of any economy or people that might say "but if you don't let us poison the environment for everyone... we'll be pooooor".  You're going to be poor even if you do.  It's only a matter of time.  That's ignoring the fact that most of the people in those industries are already poor. Oil exploits it's labor just as hard as ag does. The numbers are huge..but it's not exactly a communal bank account we're talking about. It's not going into everyone's hands. Perhaps all of the funds and effort that go into building and maintaining that industry should go elsewhere.  Honestly... with regards to australia or any other country that relies on coal, oil and gas extraction...setting fire to them is actually a terrible economic idea to begin with.  It's like winning the lottery and setting fire to the pile of cash that very day. 

We're proposing that there's a tradeoff here, but there isn't..there's only the question of whether those economies have any plan whatsoever beyond fossil fuel extraction.  Most of appalachia didn't..and you see how that went.  





(I know I have an aggressive and impatient tone about all of this, it's not you, I actually deal with this irl and you wouldn't believe the ludicrous shit the industry pulls around here in both greenwashing their own business, gaslighting the people they exploit, and constraining any and every attempt to address it into nothing -but- solutions which they know wont..so that they can then point to those failures and suggest it's all pointless...because it;s solving these problems that's too costly, you see..nevermind how expensive the problem itself has always been and how much more expensive it;s projected to become. Not their problem, they'll fuck off elsewhere and leave the rest of us holding the bag that would be empty were it not for all of the toxicity. Ruined soil, ruined economies, ruined ecosystems..ruined lives. Plenty of meth and hayron though, whoo boy.)

TLDR version, climate action is not a zero sum game - that is extremely targeted and successful messaging...just one part of the torrential wash of misinformation meant to stall or prevent meaningful reforms that would harm entrenched private interests.