[camgunz]

I admit to being tired of this vague moralizing. We're in this mess because of corrupt energy industries and fucked up factory farming on a global scale, not because I like chicken nuggets. There is absolutely zero chance that we avoid global warming because enough people voluntarily switched to a vegetarian diet. It's a non-solution, just like everyone biking, turning their a/c to 85 and heaters to 60, etc etc. It will never, ever happen unless government makes it happen, and I'm sure advocates know it, and I'm therefore forced to conclude it's just some weird eco-shaming.

[malloryerik]

Shrill messages can and do backfire, but I think there might be a point to add. If we go vegetarian, as an example, we're likely promoting new vegetarian industries which then can create real alternatives for wider and wider groups of people. For example if people start a craze for foods made from kelp and it spreads, then it can become a part of larger government-arranged action.

The same is true for alternative energies.

Meanwhile you'll agree that the consumer is indeed the most important part of any economic activity, and that they often have the most choice, as most corporate managers answer to shareholders who in turn answer to short-term profits.

[camgunz]

> Meanwhile you'll agree that the consumer is indeed the most important part of any economic activity, and that they often have the most choice

I actually disagree. I think it's difficult to be a healthy vegetarian (let alone a vegan) if you're in rural or poorer areas, as the majority of the US and indeed the world are. Most people aren't choosing their diets, they're eating what they can, or succumbing to billions of dollars of advertising carefully crafted to hypnotize them into brand loyalty to corporations dependent on factory farming. It's a fundamental flaw in market-based thinking: consumers often don't have serious choices or the information or resources to make good ones.

It's also a convenient escape hatch for irresponsible corporations and corrupt governments. "Well we agree there's a problem, but we can't fix it without unethical market regulations".

[dorchadas]

My biggest issue with living in the South and (slowly) shifting vegetarian is restaurants. I want to go out and eat with my friends, but most of them just don't have good vegetarian options, and it's really annoying. It's part of the reason why I haven't completely gone vegetarian yet.

[camgunz]

I was vegetarian for years and basically lived on fries and bad salads. I feel your pain haha.

[AstralStorm]

These industries would come in at a cost to existing ones, essentially zero sum on jobs.

Consumers do not have enough pressure and tend to go for cheaper option rather than cleaner. And for avoiding imagined concentrated fears rather than diffuse long term loss. Which is why we're in the current predicament.

[pongogogo]

Most of the startups we've seen grow massively in the last decade through word of mouth have been because people make a change and then tell others about it, i.e. viral growth.

If you switch to become veggie and start biking, and persuade >1 others to do the same, we should see exponential growth and you will have played your part in a substantial change for society.

I don't think it needs government intervention. The reasons to do it are compelling enough on their own with a little research. Look into it and consider making the change.

[camgunz]

This is generally because either it makes sense economically (YouTube dropped video distribution costs to zero), you avoid some unpleasantness (grubhub), or you're psychologically manipulated to more or less be addicted to a service (Facebook) -- in many cases all of the above. Network effects of going vegetarian are minimal, and have been since there's been meat.

It absolutely needs government intervention. For decades scientists have been warning about climate change and diets have not changed. If you look at any region with meaningful impact you'll see it's 100% due to regulation, whether that's penalties for bad garbage practices, penalties for water or electricity waste, etc. There is simply no way we crowdsource this, and my evidence is that we've had almost 40 years to do it and haven't even come close.

[AstralStorm]

The easiest thing we could do immediately is to produce fermented 100% bioethanol (petrol), retune cars, trucks and ships to burn it clean. (aircraft need more caloric fuel) This only solves emissions and not completely.

Electric powered by uranium and renewables solves more and is also immediately feasible though expensive to build infrastructure for battery handling.

Second thing would be to disperse industry and farming more evenly so that we do not have to transport food long distances. Remove energy intensive packaging (cans and bottles - use dispensers or foil), replace lighting with most efficient available. Switch manufacturing to as much on demand as possible.