Yeah, CEO of Exxon Grandma.
please tell me you have evidence for this person being a bot besides them saying that some individuals have more influence over large scale climate change than others
They have a bot symbol next to their name. But anyone can turn that on in their settings.
It’s always interesting that people are quick to talk about extreme weather changes but rarely want to address the causes. I ended up watching a video that touches on the topic. I hate Mondays.
Everyone hates Mondays and everyone loves talking about how Mondays suck! You’ll never have conversations about “fixing” Mondays though. That’s because Mondays are just a fact of life. There will always be a day you have to go to work. Moving the start day or shortening the work week doesn’t change the fact that everyone will still dislike the day their time off ends and their work hours start. You can’t “fix” Mondays.
There are also people who think other social problems are just like Mondays. Unfixable. Of course they agree it’s bad! But there’s just nothing that can be done.
Continuing with the analogy, even the honest attempts to fix Mondays are characterized as impractical, idle fantasies.
How about we don’t schedule critical meetings to start first thing Monday morning? Even if that’s the “only” time everyone can meet? And if it’s really the only time everyone has available, doesn’t that warrant questioning a bit?
Or what if we just start later on Mondays? And maybe we consider not offsetting it but working later on other days? 39-hour week? 36-hour week?
You just hit the nail on the head for things that bother me. People just throwing out ideas that “only partially” work. This isn’t just Monday’s, or climate change, but literally every fucking bit of politics. It drives me up the wall.
“Yeah but it only makes things 50% better, so I don’t support it”
So we’ll sit with 100% bad rather than 50% better because Jim in Arizona thinks we need to only have perfect solutions, and that anything that only makes things better aren’t worth investigating. Better transit, electric cars, heat pumps, hydrogen trains, gun control, sex education, free lunches? All horrible things to Jim because “they don’t solve the problem”. No, they just make it much better. Maybe we could use them while we search for the perfect solution, you know slow incremental change? No, okay then fuck you too, Jim
And while I clearly call out one side, us liberals are very guilty of this too. In fact, there’s already an example of that elsewhere in these comments.
I hate to be that guy, but it is literally already too late to reverse climate change, largely due to the attitude of people like you.
Turns out incremental change is worthless when you are on a time limit.
Take that, entire-capitalist-system-built-on-burning fossil-fuels-grandma.
Letting oil barons, war mongers, and other billionaire scum off some really big hooks with that “entirely” part…
we’re basically hoping the massive push to batteries/Solar by both China and the U.S is successful in the next decade as they are the countries with the highest KW/h usage to lay a gameplan to get neighboring countries to do the same if it proves to be fruitful.
This will not save us, we’re still set to burn way too much fossil fuel even with fast EV/solar/electrification.
We. Need. To. Consume. Less.
have you seen the sharp decline of fossil fuel based energy in some locations? The whole point in the necessary move for a battery storage in the long term is to minimize the requirement to boot up gas facilities after work hours, where peak power usage happens and solar is minimum.
The problem with global usage is poorer nations cannot afford to switch off dirty energy, and richer nations have a harsh post work hour usage. Lowering usage doesn’t fix the problem that there are dozens of countries that will still continue to burn dirty till some country invests in a cleaner option.
put in perspective, even though China and the US has the most power consumption, unlike GDP, it doesn’t take that many more countries after them to equate how much power they consume. So unless theres a global shutoff of power (which on its own, will have a plethora of long lasting problems if everything just shuts down), the best solution is to swap the type of energy that generates the most heat/green house gasses out.
There’s a few countries with huge hydroelectric resources, which are not applicable to most of the world. Other countries have merely seen a peak and slight decline, and based on trends it will take decades for that decline to reach the levels we need tomorrow. Demand for compute from the AI tech bubble has basically destroyed all the progress we’ve made since the pandemic.
The problem is too much consumption. Rich nations gobble up as much as they can and poorer nations are used as their mining pits and factories to feed the endless appetite for more, and as long as this continues the world is going to continue warming.
