[sunshinelackof]

It's scary, but there's nothing I can do. We need approachingly authoritarian action on this issue by world leaders. They've had the data for decades. And the longer they wait, the more dramatic the changes to everything will be. Certainly economic freedoms taken for today will be a thing of legend (and possibly horror.)

[adrianN]

Dumping a trillion dollars over twenty years into wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and power-to-gas would go a pretty long way without draconian measures. Providing strong monetary incentives to insulate buildings and install heat pumps doesn't have to be authoritarian either.

[dashundchen]

This! If we, the US, have the money to spend trillions to spend subsidizing the fossil fuel industry and the military industrial complex behind it, we have the money to green the economy, rebuild infrastucture and develop countless new industries and technologies.

There is so much upside and opportunity in attacking climate change and pollution, I cannot understand why so many are willing to bury their heads in the sand. Decarbonization and undoing the damage we done is the chance for a second industrial revolution, with a much higher quality of life.

[ssnistfajen]

None of these will work because a significant portion of the population in countries with elective governments do not believe in climate change at all. This means they will viciously oppose all climate change action plans so long as they are allowed a voice. Authoritarian measures become necessary (even if I don't necessarily advocate for it) when a large portion of the population are too short-sighted to decide what's best for themselves.

[hef19898]

That's what taxes are there for. E.g. in Germany we managed to implement a system to increase the share of renewables. That it wasn't perfect to begin with and was then screwed up but successive governments is a different story. What matters is that it worked.

I have the impression that most people opposing clinate change are afraid that the will loose something by the necessary changes, their cars, their perceived life style,... That's where politics come into play. Politicians have to communicate the necessary changes and come up with ways to manage the change without screwing the average Joe over. They found ways to divert billions to corporations with the best lobbyists, so there should be enough funds to combaz climate change. And once the western world started we are already half way there. The Paris accords used to be a global treaty, so there can be a global approach.

[polotics]

Hallo Leute. Believe me I would really like nothing more than for you to be right when you write:it worked The share of renewables may have risen, but at huge costs, and most importantly the installed capacity of non renewable plants has not been reduced, mostly because of intermittency of renewables. The net result: all the plants, just with lower utilisation. For nuclear this is a tragedy because the marginal costs of production are minimal, lower utilisation just hits profitability, which may indirectly be raising risks. For coal, well just look up how much the Energiewende Germany still mines... More on this here: https://jancovici.com/en/energy-transition/societal-choices/...

[ssnistfajen]

Increasing taxes is exactly what people would oppose, and a party that promises to scrap/not implement the tax will take opportunity to capture votes. This shouldn't be hard to understand.

[graeme]

If I'm reading these charts right, we currently invest roughly $300 billion per year in renewables. And more in networks, at least some of which must be for renewables.

And global carbon emissions are at their highest ever.

It's good we've built renewables rather than fossil. But the scale of the problem is WAY bigger than 1 trillion over 20 years.

https://www.iea.org/wei2018/

[sunshinelackof]

I can't imagine building subsidies and alternative fuels will undo the last 200 years of emissions. Structural changes that will reorganize our lives will be necessary. We are in a privileged position, in that we can make these structural changes in a favorable way now before we're faced with a reality that forces these changes on us.

[hef19898]

Despite all I said above, I'm sceptical. People have an ugly and annoying tendency to ignore the truth until reality bites them into their asses. They neglect cancer prevention because the risks of getting are so low while in rwality they are just afraid of the results. And that is just one example.

[agumonkey]

It won't be effective rapidly but:

- walk as much as possible

- buy as less as possible (if the sales plummet, less sending products overseas I suppose) or local

- plant trees

[ssnistfajen]

The amount of emissions reduced by these acts, multiplied by the tiny portion of the society that actually bothers to do these, is so insignificant compared to overall carbon emissions that it may as well be a rounding error. I use to believe doing my part helps the planet -- I still try to be as environmentally-conscious as possible, but I no longer believe it has an effect on the fate of our society. What one/dozen/thousands of people do is absolutely insignificant as long as these people aren't the decision-makers.

[agumonkey]

rounding errors accumulate

unlike zeros

I know very well that people consumption aren't the main polluting factor but we.. are the people, we can divert part of the cycle

[maximente]

you're right, it will do something, it just won't do very much. it's sort of like voting - important to do, just doesn't matter very much statistically speaking.

people aren't willing to talk about the heavy stuff... yet. we'll get there, but until people start talking about painful solutions - technology running daylight hours only, order of magnitude reduction in oceanic shipping, etc. - it's just feel good type stuff.

[ssnistfajen]

Campaigning and voting in elections are several orders of magnitudes more effective than paper straws or reusable shopping bags.

[epistasis]

I'm in a lucky position where I can walk to work, bike for local shopping, buy an electric car for the few times that I go on trips, etc.

IMHO, the problem isn't as much individuals not choosing to do that, but a system that prevents these choices from ever being made.

Also, not all spending is equal; buying propane or gasoline or airline tickets are clearly worse than buying a share of community solar; or buying new insulation for your home, or building new high-density apartment buildings next to a train station.

I don't think that we will ever win over climate change by championing austerity; rather we need to champion change in the system, and that takes lots of spending.

Furthermore, we are now at a point that it's going to be absolutely necessary to start pulling CO2 out of the ocean or atmosphere and sequestering it. Without a whole bunch more prosperity and cheap energy, we will never be able to do that, so building a future with super cheap and abundant solar and wind energy is pretty much the only way I can imagine us avoiding > 2C climate change.

[agumonkey]

Yes the system was aimed at more consumption and more mileage. It's hard to unplug one self from this. For some it will be impossible even, to those well don't sweat it if you're stuck.

[epistasis]

I think that unplugging may not be enough, we need to smash the systems that disallow people from unplugging. My partial unplugging may let me feel slightly less guilty, but on the absolute scale it does nothing at all to help the climate. I can wash my hands a bit morally, but the world is none the better for it. So what have I done, really? Not much. The people who have done something are the people who have made solar super cheap, who have mode wind super cheap, those that are building the battery technology that will help get to a carbonless grid, and the politicians that have enabled the tech growth through tax subsidies. My personal contribution is nothing, and it makes me sad.

Our electrical grid is slightly behind pace for decarbonization, but nowhere near as far behind as all the rest of society.

The bad part of society that has my greatest attention lately is single family zoning; this necessitates massive energy use, massive car use, and disallows anybody from creating a low-energy alternative that has all the amenities that people need in order to live. Single family zoning should be illegal. Nobody should be prevented from building an apartment building next to a small grocery store. Big-box stores should be highly restricted, instead of highly restricting apartment buildings.

(apologies for the long rant!)

[epistasis]

Many big impacts are controlled at the local level: infill development, for example, is one of the best ways for the Bay Area to reduce its emissions. Statewide, 41% of California emissions come from transportation, more than any other source.

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2017/06/climate-chan...

That is only going to change through local action, which means going to city council and planning meetings and being willing to be yelled at and lied about by those who oppose all new housing.

So it's not enough just to go alone, you need to find local friends, get them to go too, and to make sure that this viewpoint is represented in these highly undemocratic forums in which local decisions are made.

[mempko]

Reducing emissions isn't enough. ZERO emissions isn't enough.

[epistasis]

Absolutely agreed. IMHO the only way we avoid the worst calamity is with a good 33% of our energy going to active sequestration of oceanic and atmospheric carbon after 2050. And I think the best way to get there is to have solar and wind and storage technology continue to beat the best predictions possible.

But we also need to change the local as much as possible. Every single ton of CO2 we can avoid now is one less that we'll have to pull out later.

[mempko]

Yes agreed. People don't realize the magnitude at which we need to change our whole world to get there and how urgent we need to start that change.

It seems that efficiency isn't enough because people will just use up more energy. Growth and how we think about the economy is incompatible with what needs to be done.

[hef19898]

Authoritarian rule sure looks attractive in situations like that. On the surface. Maybe I'm too much liberal and democrat (in the non-US political sense, but it doesn't seem that any of authoritarian rulers we have is doing anything about it.

Without a democratic consense and legislation we won't manage to fight climate change because people won't support it and the industrialized world that is not authoritarian ruled won't buy into a climate dictatorship.

That being said, nothing good comes from dictatorship and authoritarian systems, never. If we atart to unilaterally dicide what is good and bad there is no way to tell when and where to stop. Or when we ourselves end up on the "wrong" side.

[Ididntdothis]

" Certainly economic freedoms taken for today will be a thing of legend (and possibly horror.)"

We already have plenty of rules that restrict economic freedom like not being allowed to steal or to kill people or thousands of others. If we have rules that limit the freedom to pollute there is plenty of economic freedom left. People and businesses would adapt quickly.

[daenz]

>Certainly economic freedoms taken for today will be a thing of legend (and possibly horror.)

Like what?

[maximente]

it's true that individuals aren't at fault, and that it's largely energy business and politicians who are at fault.

but, to be honest, i think that's shirking your responsibility. it's just giving up in a slightly different way - "can't do anything about this any more, need authoritarianism; my hands are clean!"

we know a small % of people can enact revolutionary change. many people are afraid, comfortable, or unable to do something like sitting in front of $national_capital, risking their jobs, etc. until that change comes.

it's unfortunate but this idea that "the people" can't enact change is silly; there's just not (yet) enough willingness to really sacrifice to get it done.

[lymeeducator]

Try to drive less, plant more, look for renewable electricity (CleanChoice or personal solar if possible), and vote the corrupt political shitheads out of office :-)