[simonhorlick]

The climate crisis is the defining issue of our lifetimes. Solutions to this problem are unlikely to come from technology. Start organising, start protesting and demand that governments begin to take this issue seriously.

[xupybd]

Technology is the only hope we have. We are increasing in number and probably couldn't feed the world without modern technology. Technology is rapidly reducing the impact that human activity has on the climate. Governments can't fix this by edict, it will need a practical solution.

[chefkoch]

>Technology is rapidly reducing the impact that human activity has on the climate.

I think it's only partially true. It really comes down to your definition of tech. But i guess your right that green tech is our only hope to keep the planet inhabitable for 8 billion people.

[tubularhells]

Technology is the problem. You cannot fix it with more technology.

[xupybd]

As an example if still were to heat and cook primarily with wood fires our cities would be choked with even more smoke than they have.

A counter example is cars, cars have come with new technology and as such they have increased our emissions. But they have lowered their emissions overtime. Cars will continue to get more efficient and cleaner.

This is the trend the more we advance the cleaner our technology gets. However we also seem to use more and energy as we expand our numbers. There are two options, reduce our numbers or increase our efficiencies. I rather like humanity and the freedom to procreate so I put all my eggs in the efficiency basket. The only way I know that increases efficiency is to develop new technology.

[tubularhells]

More cars is still more net positive emission than no cars (I never drove in my life), so I don't really understand with what wicked logic you try to explain that cars are good.

[demygale]

I completely agree. A solution is available to us right now: regulation. Ignoring this solution in favor of economic growth or a future magic bullet is folly.

Demand your government do more. If you are in the US and a Republican, at least politely request that your party acknowledge climate change as a reality.

[pgwhalen]

It’s just as easy to say that solutions are unlikely to come from anything but technology. But organizing/protesting/demanding might be a big part of the way we get there.

[jnxx]

> Solutions to this problem are unlikely to come from technology.

I'd say from technology alone. It is clearly also a collective and societal problem. But a big part of the problem is that much of the things we do are mal-adapted to that reality, and need to be changed - and this will, of course, include a lot of new technology.

[st1x7]

Can I suggest the exact opposite? The best solutions are likely to come exactly from technology because technology solutions are systematic. The impact of government policy and individual action just doesn't scale in the same way.

Asking people to consume less meat, won't do anything - creating lab-grown meat and making it cheaper than the alternatives will phase out most factory farming by itself. Regulations on fossil fuels won't reach every country and won't persist with every change of government - making cleaner fuels more economically viable than fossil fuels will scale over the entire planet. This isn't an argument against regulations - until the tech catches up, regulations might be the best we can do but better and cheaper technology is always a more persistent option.

It's very similar to what is happening with coronavirus - you can have the government impose some measures, you can ask people to make responsible decisions but that is just buying time until technology actually solves the problem - invent a vaccine and you have the problem as close to solved as possible. I think the same goes with climate change, the difference is that for climate change we need a large number of really good technology solutions instead of just one.

[core-questions]

Protesting doesn't accomplish systematic change. Protesting under totalitarian liberalism is only allowed when it is functionally the equivalent of a parade: a celebration of the existing values of the elites.

[MH15]

This is why riots can be good, actually. The common sanctioned protest in the States currently is a "rally" not a "protest".

[davidhbolton]

It makes me so sad that people believe this is a problem without strong scientifically rigorous evidence.

Climate crisis should be lumped in as fake news, disinformation until such time as it can either be shown to be real or not. How many more failed predictions such as the end of snow by 2010 do we have to put up with.

Even those politicians who spouted on about this such as Al Gore and Barack Obama have bought expensive sea front houses. Clearly they are no longer worried about rising sea levels...

[chefkoch]

How many percent of scientists agreeing on a issue is enough for you? 95% 98% 99,5%?