[housingisaright]

How you like to cook pasta aside. This is so dumb. No one is going to solve the climate crisis with not boiling the pasta while certain companies is reaponaible for basically all emissions.

What is the word for this? When you try socialise problems like this to try shift blame? I’m still surprised how many people don’t know thar “climate footprint “ is invented by one of the bigger oil companies in a similar campaign.

[bradleyjg]

It’s not exactly what you are referring to but I like to call out conservation theater. Like when restaurants in California were forbidden from giving water to people unless they asked for it. As if drinking water was even a rounding error on California’s water issues.

[shepherdjerred]

That's the perfect word for it!

On one hand small actions can lead to big change. On the other hand, no matter how many small actions are taken, this problem isn't going to be solved with government intervention.

[bradleyjg]

On one hand small actions can lead to big change.

This is one of those things that we teach small children so they can feel like they are contributing but never go back and explain to teens that we were bs’ing about. These kids then grow up with a bad model of how the world works. This dynamic is pernicious.

No amount of at home composting or whatever the latest peacock thing is will make a real dent.

[modeopfer]

Is that a typo? I feel that this problem isn't going to be solved _without_ government intervention. Large groups of people have an unbelievably high inertia.

But yeah, forbidding restaurants to distribute drinking water is probably not the right move.

[shepherdjerred]

Yup that's a typo hah.

[notatoad]

> while certain companies is reaponaible for basically all emissions.

those "certain companies" are exclusively energy companies. the energy they provide can be used for things like boiling water. it's good to hold companies responsible, but don't delude yourself into thinking individuals can't have an impact. the energy we use is a collection of a whole bunch of small things, added up (and a couple really big things, like driving cars and raising cattle)

[carlmr]

Apart from that is Barilla one of those certain companies? I'm guessing no, so it's not like they gain much from helping their customers save energy. Except maybe if people want to save energy by not cooking noodles, and Barilla doesn't want to lose those customers.

Although honestly I wouldn't know what else to cook that uses less energy. Rice cooks for even longer, although less water is heated here.

[PestoDiRucola]

I'd like to add some context here: the whole cooking pasta with the stove off became a major talking point in Italian social media some months ago (I'm serious). It all started with a popular science educator posting a video on Youtube explaining the science behind it. Then some influencers decided to promote the idea because of reasons such as climate change and the energy crisis, which in turn started being ridiculed for the same reasons you are mentioning. Barilla just jumped on the occasion for some easy marketing both at home and on the international market.

[Arn_Thor]

A thousand small changes add up, however. Also, don't forget how those companies responsible for all those emissions make stuff that we eagerly buy up. The emissions are "their", but really on our behalf.

And I'm well aware of the hypocrisy in me typing this on a plastic keyboard in a plastic office chair wearing synthetic clothing. I could have carved keycaps out of wood and made a typing device with an Arduino, sourced sustainable wood for a chair and bought "green" cotton clothing. I didn't, because plastic is cheaper and more convenient. But I'm not blaming Logitech for making the products I'm happy to buy.

[vasco]

> A thousand small changes add up, however

You also start optimising your computer programs not by targeting the function that takes 90% of the time, but the utility method that takes 0.0001%, I see.

"Every little bit counts" thinking is one of the most destructive in society.

[Arn_Thor]

Nice straw man. Well done.

I'll gladly take an extra few minutes to make my pasta if it saves a lot of energy and emissions. But you do you, bud

[vasco]

It doesn't save a lot, while making you feel good for optimizing something very close to 100% useless, that's the whole point of my argument.

[anonu]

Changing people's habits because it's the "right thing to do" is not the way to solve climate change. The main reason why is that it's very hard to change people, especially so if the benefits are not immediate. What we do need is lots of innovative new technologies to solve the problem. Carbon capture is just scratching the surface.

[Arn_Thor]

There is no "the way to solve climate change" anyway. It's a challenge so huge that it will require us to change something about everything we do and the way we do it.

[Synaesthesia]

I do think that the way certain people live can be improved, look at the carbon use of rich people in the USA compared to the average person in other countries. Larger houses, cars, more of everything, it all adds up.

[anonu]

Its fine to think that - and you're probably right. But again the solution will never be to ask people to change their consumption habits and their way of life. Its a non starter. The smarter thing to do is tweak incentives. A simple tax on electricity for example: now its more expensive to heat or cool a large house, leads to smaller homes, leads to more energy efficient units. That has a way way more impactful result than telling individuals what to do and how to do it.

[octodog]

Do you think energy companies drill oil and burn it for fun??

They do it to provide consumers with energy and consumer goods. If consumers are more efficient or reduce their consumption then demand for these goods and services fall.

Shifting blame to companies to avoid personal responsibility certainly won't help solve the climate crisis.

[quickthrower2]

Supply creates demand. If gas / electricity was 10x the price, you would suddenly see a lot more efficiency!

[xkbarkar]

Agreed. Saw similar tacticts during the bank crash in 2018 Blame was shifted to all the peasants byuing flat screen tvs.

Please dont participate in this co-dependent blame shift. Cook your pasta as you like and force media tp hold the real culprits accountable. Yesterday there was a thread on coal used to generate energy in various parts of the world. We could start by focusing attention to finance greener sources there.

Yeah I know, I sound like a hopeful hippie.

[bjohnson225]

Shifting all responsibility to producers is about as helpful as shifting it all to consumers. Clearly there is responsibility on both sides. Burning gas for cooking or heating is bad for emissions, so it is reasonable for people to avoid doing so for longer than necessary. Same goes for producers burning fossil fuels for electricity, etc.

[oliv__]

Gotta hand it to Barilla's marketing department. They found a way to seem climate conscious talking about cooking pasta

[pnt12]

I think it's a form of greenwashing.

> Companies that intentionally take up greenwashing communication strategies often do so in order to distance themselves from the environmental lapses of themselves or their suppliers.

It was one fuel company who popularized the carbon footprint calculator, such that consumers don't focus on the massive harm the company caused.

[ravenstine]

"Greenwashing" is probably the term you're looking for.

[masklinn]

Also “victim blaming” and “crowd fucking”.

That’s when you ratio water to home and tell people they need to save a gallon on their shower but you literally ship millions of gallons of water to SA.