• Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t think anybody is surprised. Has anyone actually tried anything? Nah didn’t think so.

    Here’s me not showering doing all my plastic reduction. Not driving not going on holz. Buying things from shops.

    One rich person negates ally efforts

    • silence7@slrpnk.netOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We’re actually doing enough that the acceleration has started to slow. There’s some indications that emissions are going to start dropping in the next few years, but we’re still decades from the point where concentrations stop rising.

          • cmbabul@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m all for doing everything we can, but I think we may have to scale down what we mean by civilization at the point of acceleration we’re already at, we need to start prioritizing the things from this period that are useful and worth preserving. Because the way we currently live is coming to a close whether we like it or not unless someone invents some Star Trek shit

          • uphillbothways@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            That is the weakest, most watered down non-objective ever. I pity anyone forced to live on the planet we are currently leaving behind. It would be more merciful to potential future life to just give up, stop procreating and stop acting like we give a shit.
            The human race is a failure. Call the experiment concluded. We lost. And, we did it to ourselves. Pathetic.

            (Ideally, we’d just turn everything off now and quietly go extinct without doing further damage, to be honest. We know we’re going to fail, yet we continue to pull every other species in along with us. But, we’re not even decent enough to do that.)

  • HaiZhung@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    While I appreciate the sentiment, I think it’s unrealistic to expect the greenhouse gas concentration in the atmosphere to decrease. For that, we already would need net 0 emissions AND some sort of carbon capture system in place.

    For now, what must decrease is greenhouse gas emissions, and the article admits that that is what happened (but the decrease was so low it could be attributed to natural fluctuations).

    • MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There are natural systems capturing carbon as well. The problem is that it takes 10,000 years or so to capture all humans have released to date. So zero emissions would already lower concentration over time.

    • Sonori@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can probably lose the /s. While space launches do have an environmental impact, it’s honestly negligible compared to manufacturing or even aor travel. It can be reduced of course, most of it is in materials and transport, but scale does matter, and i feel like that ire would be better directed towards the companies that do more damage in a hour than they do in a year.