ODGreen

Well, I guess boomers are chemicals polluting the environment if you think about it.

https://archive.is/vxV5v

Non-paywalled version.

Thank you for this.

Note that the population peak happens earlier in this UN model revision.

However there is a plausible case for population to peak much earlier (2040):

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2024/06/peak-population-projections/

Hydrogen: the crypto of green energy.

As are the Dems. Well, they at least slap a rainbow sticker on the oil rigs.

It’s a dictatorship that just did some ethnic cleansing. COP29 is going to be an absolute joke.

I’ve been trying to find clothing made in my overdeveloped country. Though the only textile we make here is wool, maybe linen, it’s a way to support labour practices that are not sweatshops.

Still learning more names of species that live here. I’m starting to spot some trees quicker. ID’d all the trees around my apartment.

Edit: also found local farms to get a good chunk of produce from. Food miles don’t matter as much as people believe, but strong rural economies do: less likely to turn into exurbs, and less of my money going to supermarket extortionists.

Sky burial for me please.

I = PAT

Impact is equal to population times affluence times technology.

Decreasing human population can help to decrease impact, as long as the smaller population doesn’t disproportionately increase its resource use (affluence x technology)

Or, proper running water systems vs having to buy plastic jugs of water.

Certainly the formula can be sharpened but it’s a decent heuristic for thinking about impact.