Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by wahnfrieden 1032 days ago
Consumer purchasing shifting toward more correct purchases isn’t a solution at all. Your examples are essentially luxury market items that don’t scale to humanity with questionable net impact
1 comments

Not really. Vehicles are a large part of the Western fabric for example, and the popularity of SUVs in the recent decades have led to an uptick in emissions - therefore, disincentivizing SUVs is one option. Governments are already rolling out solutions like "greener home" grants, that offers rebates for improving insulation. If scaled across a country, lower use of AC/heating can have a significant impact on energy demands, and it was an easy program to implement. Food waste is another angle that is a no-brainer.

In the food department, legumes and whole grains are not "luxury" items, but can serve as a substitute for meat. Even omnivores (I am one) who are health-conscious tend now to make a point to include more of these in their diet, and they're cheap.

Bearing in mind that these interventions are meant for short-run downward pressure on emissions (in the West), and short-run interventions are what we need. There is low-hanging fruit still, which can be exploited without dampening quality of life and without "mandates". In the long-run it's all a moot point, between nuclear/fusion and renewables. There is also a ton of public/private investment into carbon capture, renewables, the works - but that is not moving quickly, even though this would be the most valuable.