Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AnthonyMouse 42 days ago
> By the way, not having children is also more eco-friendly, because an infinite series simply converges.

This one isn't actually accurate. Younger people have longer time horizons (i.e. aren't expecting to be dead as soon) and are therefore more likely to support policies like electrifying transportation and generating power from lower CO2 sources, and policies get enacted when they have majority support, so causing the population to skew older by reducing the number of children is ecologically very bad.

1 comments

In theory. In reality the number of young people concerned about climate change is high, but the number of those willing to then not take a airplane for a few days of vacation is pretty low in my experience.

So supporting policies, "that somebody should do something" sure, also my generation thinks like this and the older one. But supporting policies that also actually affect themself, different story.

Because there is also the effect of doomerism. If the world is doomed anyway, then I can at least enjoy my vacation while I am still alive.

> In reality the number of young people concerned about climate change is high, but the number of those willing to then not take a airplane for a few days of vacation is pretty low in my experience.

Probably because air travel is something like 2% of CO2 emissions, driving long distances also emits CO2 so the actual reduction is more like 1%, and people understand what a cost/benefit ratio is.

Meanwhile they're significantly more likely to do things like buy an electric car or hybrid or install rooftop solar, which makes a much larger actual difference.

> But supporting policies that also actually affect themself, different story.

Who is more likely to support voting to fund car chargers, working people who are tired of buying gas or retirees who want to use that money to increase government retirement benefits?

> Because there is also the effect of doomerism.

Doomerism itself comes from being in the minority.

I would support air travel taxes even though I’ve used a plane 5 times this year already.

Just because I don’t believe in voluntary action doesn’t mean I wouldn’t accept society-wide policy. I want impactful societal action, not self-harm disguised as feelgood ecohobbies.

This problem can only be solved by coordinated government intervention.