this post was submitted on 17 Sep 2023
58 points (95.3% liked)

Memes

45575 readers
1605 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] beteljuice@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We need both. Fucking hate binary thinking. It's a curse.

[–] underisk@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe, but one seems to get all the attention and little results.

[–] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 year ago

That's because no one pays attention to the huge developments in infrastructure or the amazing new technologies coming to market - e fuels like sequestered carbon jet fuel made from excess renewable power, and no it's not a science fiction dream it's happening now. Of course we should have more funding for these things but they are happening.

A huge part of that problem is that people resist even the slightest positive change, paper straws are fine but I bet there are people who like this post who also liked posts complaining about them - if we stopped organized sports and spent that half a trillion on transitioning local infrastructure or establishing carbon sequestration systems with productive use of captured carbon (e.g. building materials that get landfilled at eol) we could move much faster, but no one will give up a single football game to save the planet they'd rather bomb something and feel like a hero

[–] Flinch@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I did it, and so can you, Jack! biden-rember

Am I the only one who thinks this is funny? It's a joke people.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not saying I disagree but methinks many of you don't realize everything we use fossil fuels for from plastic to fertilizer it's not just gas. You think costs are spiralling out of control now.... oooh boy just wait.

[–] Katana314@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Society would change, a lot. I’d be very interested in what a plastic-phobic society would look like. Remember milkmen, who would take one empty glass bottle and give you a full one?

[–] Bloodyhog@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

As in, billions will die? That is a big change indeed...

[–] Meowoem@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah it's scary that people don't seem to understand that this would lead to billions dead which would cause chaos and resources wars that totally doom the planet.

We need infrastructure to transition, we need technological innovations and cultural stability

[–] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's true, we need fossil fuels for so many things besides transportation. At the same time, we are simply running out of fossil fuels. Even if we ignore the impact on the environment completely, there will be a point in the not too distant future when there will simply be nothing left to pump.

So what I am wondering is, even if one thinks man made climate change is a hoax or something similar, shouldn't the first and foremost thing everyone agrees on be to still spare those scarce resources? For things we really ("really") need to make from oil?

The first thing that comes to mind (maybe since I work in the lab) is medical equipment. You don't really want to have to wash and reuse things like catheters, do you? I am not sure if bioplastics (i.e., still plastics, but made from plants) would be an alternative here once we run out but I sincerely hope so.

Prices will go up, in any case, and it will be a painful transistion. But now we are at a somewhat luxurious point where we can still make this transistion somewhat controlled and "smoothly". If we continue to treat oil as a never ending resource and then do a surprised pikachu face once there is nothing left this will be much much worse, won't they?

We already know how to create plastics from CO2 extracted from the air and hydrogen from water. There is no shortage of raw material for plastics. The main question for the industry is cheap plastics and the answer to that has always been cheap oil and gas.

Using proven reserves and current consumption you get to 47 years and things run out. That's a "within my lifetime" number for many.

[–] spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly this would speed up the process of transitioning away from FF.

[–] FrankHerbert@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A bunch of people would die early.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago

Not gonna lie, it's way past too late to really be able to spare human life from the effects of climate change. A revolution likely won't even be enough at this point.

[–] Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd be much more likely to support and sympathize with a group blowing up fossil fuel infrastructure than standing in the fucking road, blocking traffic.

[–] FrankHerbert@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Until gasoline became unavailable (while still being needed by billions of people) because of terrorism instead of a more reasonable approach.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz -1 points 1 year ago

🤔 Okay, let's hack the banks, redistribute all of the money electronically and then pay for electric infrastructure ourselves.

[–] Mangoholic@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago

But stuff like pipeline infrastructure, could be used for transporting hydrogen as ammonia in the future.

[–] UniDestroyer@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

At least y'all are being honest now. I was getting tired of being gaslit.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What did you think all of the talk about revolution involved? Radical change isn't normally achieved through peaceful measures

[–] UniDestroyer@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's my point. I knew y'all were wannabe terrorists for a while, but everyone kept denying/downplaying it. I now have several highly up voted posts to point at. I'm sure the denial will continue, but this a start.

[–] LinkOpensChest_wav@lemmy.one 2 points 1 year ago

Funny how the people who want to harm the oil companies are "terrorists," but the people literally destroying the earth are not

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Radical? Sure. Terrorist? Nah. Liberals (and especially right wing libs) are violent towards marginalized groups and literally the planet itself, among others. Marxists, anarchists, etc. are violent towards capitalism and those who seek to uphold it. Revolution takes shape in many ways and some of those are violent, particularly towards the end. Don't act like the system we're living in isn't abhorrent and violent. Politics in all of its forms boil down to violence. What are you seeking to build, what needs to be destroyed, who stands in your way, and what means are you able to use? That's politics in a nutshell. Answer those questions for the majority of governments the world over and then answer them for your left wing Boogeyman of choice. Which sounds like it's worth fighting for?

[–] Sylver@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

That “gaslighting” was us asking nicely