The USA, China, and India are the leaders on Climate Change emmisions, and have to make real changes for global results. Until us three get serious, progress is nil.
Energy is very expensive which makes everything expensive like normal cost like groceries, heating, everyday transportation. Housing market is the worst, too little houses are being build because of all the rules. Too many people are being let in which is leading to an overheated market for buying and renting houses.
For normal people this is a bad situation. It’s only good for property owners (that sell houses) and the government because more tax income.
I’m lucky that I am a software engineer and have an above average salary. But the average person in my country (the Netherlands) is worse off. I hear many stories of people that can’t go on holiday anymore abroad while 5 years ago they could.
This all in the name of being green and being the best boy in class. Set an example. Need to start somewhere. We (our country hence the tax payers) spent billions on it. And get very very little in return.
Climate scientists keep telling us that achievable emissions reductions aren't going to be enough to prevent bad climate effects. The single-minded focus on emissions reduction is not going to save the world and it has a lot of bad effects on economies and ultimately people. We need to be investing in solutions that could actually work, like stratospheric aerosol injection.
Europe makes a terrible mistake. They are obsessive to decarbonate not because of climate change (they emit a measly 8% of total, the earth will feel nothing) but because the developed north wants to continue heating its homes and moving its cars after fossil fuels. But this will come after 50 or 100 years, it's too early to take so painful measures. In software design its called YAGNI.
Focusing solely on total carbon emissions without considering per capita figures, and only on the present without acknowledging historical responsibility, is blatant discrimination and exploitation of developing countries by the developed world.
The European Union has certainly done a lot for environmental protection, but many of its politicians are more concerned with exploiting less developed nations through green barriers, just as they previously did through technology and patents.
Don't just focus on reducing emissions; why not consider increasing carbon sinks? A balanced approach is more effective. Learn from China: its increase in forest coverage, its desert reclamation, and the massive development of wind and solar power are all results of decades of relentless effort.
Stop the condescending finger-pointing. For example, China is often criticized for its ocean fishing, but critics ignore that its aquaculture production far surpasses its marine capture. How many countries in the world can achieve that? For species that are difficult to farm, they first master artificial breeding to release fry back into the sea, before advancing toward the goal of full-cycle aquaculture. People's well-being and environmental protection must be balanced, not subjected to rigid, one-size-fits-all policies made for the sake of votes.
8 comments
[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 34.5 ms ] threadEnergy is very expensive which makes everything expensive like normal cost like groceries, heating, everyday transportation. Housing market is the worst, too little houses are being build because of all the rules. Too many people are being let in which is leading to an overheated market for buying and renting houses.
For normal people this is a bad situation. It’s only good for property owners (that sell houses) and the government because more tax income.
I’m lucky that I am a software engineer and have an above average salary. But the average person in my country (the Netherlands) is worse off. I hear many stories of people that can’t go on holiday anymore abroad while 5 years ago they could.
This all in the name of being green and being the best boy in class. Set an example. Need to start somewhere. We (our country hence the tax payers) spent billions on it. And get very very little in return.
The European Union has certainly done a lot for environmental protection, but many of its politicians are more concerned with exploiting less developed nations through green barriers, just as they previously did through technology and patents.
Don't just focus on reducing emissions; why not consider increasing carbon sinks? A balanced approach is more effective. Learn from China: its increase in forest coverage, its desert reclamation, and the massive development of wind and solar power are all results of decades of relentless effort.
Stop the condescending finger-pointing. For example, China is often criticized for its ocean fishing, but critics ignore that its aquaculture production far surpasses its marine capture. How many countries in the world can achieve that? For species that are difficult to farm, they first master artificial breeding to release fry back into the sea, before advancing toward the goal of full-cycle aquaculture. People's well-being and environmental protection must be balanced, not subjected to rigid, one-size-fits-all policies made for the sake of votes.