A big trouble for the survival of arctic foxes, polar bears or seals that need to go out of the sea to reproduce. The ecosystem could collapse in a lot of places in no time.
I wonder if we could raise a net of floating structures for saving some at least.
It's not surprising but very sad, how we have traded the stability of the biosphere for developing way more technology than is necessary to make us comfortable. Probably about 1% of all of what we produce would be necessary to get us to the same level of comfort. The other 99% is just technology for the sake of consuming technology. It's a shame that en masse we have no global central means to collectively decide to be more sustainable. Not surprising given that all changes must be made within the ulta-efficient system of global capitalism whose value placed on nature is effectively zero.
I can't give you a different economic system than global capitalism. But we know exactly what it will take to dramatically reduce emissions.
Globally, people want electricity, power, cars, hot water ect. When we can provide those goods and services, in a carbon free way at a lower cost than a carbon intensive way - everyone globally will adopt the low carbon technology.
There's great reason for hope. In 1975 solar cells cost $115.3 / watt. Today in China they're available for $0.09 / watt or a price drop of 99.9%. There is no magic, we simply need the low carbon technology to be cheaper.
Now ecosystem collapse and habitat preservation? That's not as simple, but I ask that you lobby your local representatives to build dense housing near parks and public transit. Let's leave nature to the animals and build beautiful cities
> When we can provide those goods and services, in a carbon free way at a lower cost than a carbon intensive way - everyone globally will adopt the low carbon technology.
Even given that, the carbon-free way is still destructive. And wake me up when we're even 20% of the way there. Looking at the CO2 output so far, it looks like it's a pipe dream.
And even then, we still need a return to near pre-industrial levels. More technology will just make it less likely for people to rewild lands, and there will be too many people.
What we need is a complete dismantling of all technology.
Readit News
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54508-3
I wonder if we could raise a net of floating structures for saving some at least.
Globally, people want electricity, power, cars, hot water ect. When we can provide those goods and services, in a carbon free way at a lower cost than a carbon intensive way - everyone globally will adopt the low carbon technology.
There's great reason for hope. In 1975 solar cells cost $115.3 / watt. Today in China they're available for $0.09 / watt or a price drop of 99.9%. There is no magic, we simply need the low carbon technology to be cheaper.
Now ecosystem collapse and habitat preservation? That's not as simple, but I ask that you lobby your local representatives to build dense housing near parks and public transit. Let's leave nature to the animals and build beautiful cities
Even given that, the carbon-free way is still destructive. And wake me up when we're even 20% of the way there. Looking at the CO2 output so far, it looks like it's a pipe dream.
And even then, we still need a return to near pre-industrial levels. More technology will just make it less likely for people to rewild lands, and there will be too many people.
What we need is a complete dismantling of all technology.