Ecology topic

[Anomalocaris]

Coca cola makes what we want. The consequences of what we want aint cokes problem.

And they couldn't do it in glass bottles?

Glass is 4 times more dense than plastic.  To make brittle glass as breakage resistant as pliable plastic you will need a much greater volume of glass than you can get away with for plastic.  So glass bottle weigh many times more than plastic.  This means shipping the same net weight of beverage entails shipping a much greater gross weight.   This in turn means burning much more fuel and emitting much more green house gas.

Situations are usually more complicated than strident advocates with such clear and yet confused ideas of good and bad are willing to admit.

[Fake Messiah]

 So glass bottle weigh many times more than plastic.  This means shipping the same net weight of beverage entails shipping a much greater gross weight.   This in turn means burning much more fuel and emitting much more green house gas.

But decomposing plastic bottles also emit green house gases, and we're talking about million plastic bottles being bought around the world every minute which then additionally destroy the oceans, environment, enter into the food and water and therefore get ingested by humans and animals. While glass can be reused and recycled.

Granted, if coca-cola used glass bottles they wouldn't be able to sell as much as drinks as they are selling now, which wouldn't be so bad since people would ingest less sugar.

[Fake Messiah]

So climate strike is happening all over the world. Thousands of people are going out in streets and protesting today.

[Fake Messiah]

Young Swedish climate change activist Greta Thunberg has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by a group of Norwegian socialist deputies.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/swedish-teen...obel-prize

Oh well. Greta is the only hope for a lot of people. Like these kids in India who are living on a landfill mountain. They can only hope that Greta will save them - not some politician, not some god and certainly not pope or some some religious leader rolling in money, but only Greta.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

People used to scour the roadsides for pop bottles to turn in and redeem the deposit. A coke bottle could be cleaned and reused dozens of times. I used to get candy money this way.

[Fake Messiah]

Sad to see David Attenborough being manipulated by his parents into saying these things

[Fake Messiah]

So massive climate protests are happening again right now all over the world, although mostly in cities in Europe.

Harrison Ford also gave a speech in UN meeting

[Anomalocaris]

The real major hurdles that needs to first be overcome to tackle the climate crisis does not appear to be on the radar of most of those marching.

[The Grand Nudger]

This will be specific to the US (though it's generally applicable to any developed country).  

The majority of fossil fuel energy consumption relates to industry and transportation.  These are efficient and (currently) non negotiable uses of fossil fuel energy.  Even if the worlds population has to live in bubbles someday, a human life inside the bubble will be demonstrably and qualitatively better on account of it.  Already is, a physical bubble is just a monument to how we already address environmental issues and their relationship to humanity. IMO, the real major hurdle in tackling the climate crisis is finding alternatives to that consumption which can be offered to the much larger portion of the worlds population just now seeking the benefits of that consumption, as we've had for all these years.  

As nutballs rightly note - it doesn't matter what the now developed world does, short of offering a new and equal paradigm for development.  Anything less is just telling the global poors why they cant have sterile syringes and food (spoiler alert, we bought them all). That will never fly.

---

to add to the above, whatever effect the current way of conceptualizing the issue has had, it seems insufficient. While less in each category, residential and commercial use of fossil fuel energy together account for as much as transportation or industry alone (and a huge chunk of "transportation" -is- "residential or commercial use"...driving our cars to and from all of those nifty stores). The hearts and minds campaign isn't going well by the measure of response in thread or the levels of consumption seen. What most people could do, to effect climate change, is drastically change their lives down to the materials we build our homes out of..and what foods we eat, when, from where. Boycotting industry and their related transportation, in effect, is a losers bet. We need that productivity to solve any issue however we decide to solve it. Non negotiable.

[Fake Messiah]

The majority of fossil fuel energy consumption relates to industry and transportation.  These are efficient and (currently) non negotiable uses of fossil fuel energy.

Non negotiable? I would rather say that "we" need a plan and one of the plans could surely involve what is Bill Gates developing: Traveling Wave Reactor. Or at least what he was developing until he got Trumped



I mean imagine the mathematical possibilities with TWR: it's clean, it produces electricity for decades without being refueled, it's small, easy to build (once developed), could be dispersed everywhere, no emissions.

It could produce cheap and clean electricity which could then be used to create fuel for cars, suck out the carbon from the air, filter the industry chimneys, even filter the smoke from burning garbage (so we get rid of garbage).

But, unfortunately, people today are afraid of nuclear energy. Even of TWR. Although even the most polluting nuclear power-plants don't come close to how much lives coal power-plants take or, not to mention, oil refineries.
But TWR doesn't come close to any of that. It is completely clean, nothing comes in, nothing comes out (except electricity)

The thing is that people want to clean up the world. There are volunteering organizations that collect like garbage from oceans, but once they remove them it kind of returns back into the ocean because humans don't know what to do with it but pile it on some place. And yes US and Europe are one of the "lucky" countries because they get to take their plastic garbage and ship it away to the less fortunate countries that drown in it. Let's face it people - recycling plastic is a pipe dream. It is just dumping your own garbage into the countries with corrupt leaders and even they have the limit. Once even they will be full and New York, Huston, Berlin, Paris won't be that beautiful anymore but also filled with plastic trash.

Even if the worlds population has to live in bubbles someday, a human life inside the bubble will be demonstrably and qualitatively better on account of it.

Come on Gae, you're a nature guy. Imagine if you could never take out your kids to the lake, to the stroll, fishing, but always cooped up behind the glass watching outside into the white smog, inhaling oxygen from a tank; cooped up inside of a bubble while the nature is dying outside. Besides, bubble wouldn't be big enough for all people in the world.

Also, people in China already live like this and they aren't much happy about it

IMO, the real major hurdle in tackling the climate crisis is finding alternatives to that consumption which can be offered to the much larger portion of the worlds population just now seeking the benefits of that consumption, as we've had for all these years.

That's because politicians aren't doing enough. Some have plans like UK plans to go all green in 20 years and solar and wind prices are going down, but real plan would be developing something like TWR.

As nutballs rightly note - it doesn't matter what the now developed world does, short of offering a new and equal paradigm for development.

Nutballs' stance is that people who want change just want all industry and transport to stop and that people kill each other. Nutballs don't care to learn about solutions, they don't care to know about the problems, they seem to be in love with the oil and can't imagine their lives with something else in its place.