I’m sure most world governments are ignoring scientists saying “there is still a chance if we do these things” because those things would damage global conglomerate profits. We’re fucked. Unless a lot of us suddenly become ecoterrorists targeting the biggest polluters.
Small changes never were a viable solution, but for a while they could be sold as one. Especially the ones where the consumer became the problem and one to take action (recycling et al.) Only a complete restructuring of society would do much of anything, and now it’s even too late for that because of both the time and the population. Yeah, it’s pessimistic and doomerism, but it’s also reality.
It didn’t need “a complete restructuring of society” – that’s its own kind of cynical disinformation – but rather just (a) ending subsidies for polluting industries (including imposing taxes to compensate for externalities) and (b) zoning reform to cease subsidizing low density.
So much for the 1.5° goal…
I’m sure most world governments are ignoring scientists saying “there is still a chance if we do these things” because those things would damage global conglomerate profits. We’re fucked. Unless a lot of us suddenly become ecoterrorists targeting the biggest polluters.
Small changes never were a viable solution, but for a while they could be sold as one. Especially the ones where the consumer became the problem and one to take action (recycling et al.) Only a complete restructuring of society would do much of anything, and now it’s even too late for that because of both the time and the population. Yeah, it’s pessimistic and doomerism, but it’s also reality.
It didn’t need “a complete restructuring of society” – that’s its own kind of cynical disinformation – but rather just (a) ending subsidies for polluting industries (including imposing taxes to compensate for externalities) and (b) zoning reform to cease subsidizing low density.