Id like lemmings take on how they would actually reduce emissions on a level that actually makes a difference (assuming we can still stop it, which is likely false by now, but let’s ignore that)

I dont think its as simple as “tax billionaires out of existence and ban jets, airplanes, and cars” because thats not realistic.

Bonus points if you can think of any solutions that dont disrupt the 99%'s way of life.

I know yall will have fun with this!

    • over_clox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      How we gonna melt steel, copper, titanium, tungsten, etc?

      Sadly, fossil fuels aren’t going away anytime soon. ☹️

      • Usernameblankface@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        9 months ago

        There are ways to melt those without burning fossil fuels. Whether the alternatives are easy, affordable, or can run at a useful rate is debatable

  • Brkdncr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Vote.

    Edit: to be clear, vote in every election you have access to. Local voting and primaries are just important. Voting even if you don’t like any of the options is still important.

    If you don’t vote then you’re part of the problem.

  • over_clox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Ban planned obsolescence and make a rigorous standard that any new device is designed repairable, reliable and long lasting enough to last at least 10 years if treated right, 20+ years for vehicles and machinery…

    This whole ‘you gotta get a new thing every year’ era causes sooo much unnecessary waste and pollution ☹️

  • DarkCloud@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    But it’s time to disrupt 99% of life.

    Survey humanity, produce an agreed on level of technology and lifestyle.

    We probably need to limit ourselves to housing, food, internet, and safety/defense for everyone and not much else - then slow all industries based on HOW people want to live.

    So getting rid of things like, plastic toys, gizmos, extravagances. Phones wouldn’t be updated as often. People would only be able to update their tech if they could meaningfully show it was necessary.

    Lots of technology companies would be folded. Lots of industries would be nationalised and folded. International tourism would be greatly restricted. All the stuff we don’t need basically.

    People would be mostly employed in the basics: Housing, food, internet. Too far beyond that and you’d have to rely on local people/groups/makers/repair companies.

    So massive degrowth, nationalization, and restrictions/regulations to the market.

    Most of all, corporations would no longer count as people. In fact society should have to rely on person to person contracting. I don’t really think corporations should exist becuase they become Zombies/Golems that do a lot of destructive things.

    Basically degrowth, and restructuring society around degrowth.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 months ago

    The idea of personal action vs. corporate/government action is a false choice. The government can force the corpos to stop burning the planet, but that will mean significant lifestyle changes for everybody.

    It also means getting our shit together about immigration/ migration/ refugees. And not just in the US, but globally. A humanitarian catastrophe is assured otherwise.

    I’m not optimistic.

  • Professorozone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Major corporations caused this, only major corporations can solve it. Laws would have to be passed requiring them to offset the damage from everything they do. Coops would need to be set up wherever possible for one industry to reuse waste from another. Subsidies would need to be ethically set up to encourage industry involved with cleaning the environment. Cooperation between nations to combat global issues would be needed. Actual consequences for industries it nations that violate. Education!! And most importantly convince half the world’s population to give a shit or even believe the problem exists. I’ve probably missed some.

    The alternative would be magic.

    Yeah, between the two, I think magic is probably more realistic. Let’s go with that.

  • Feyd@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    dont disrupt the 99%'s way of life.

    This is ridiculous, because the problem inherently requires cooperative change, and as we’ve seen people will throw shitfits over things as small as plastic straws.

    A big thing would be to start switching from ever expanding auto infrastructure to public transit systems where possible.

    1. Fewer vehicles that transport more people
    2. Can use the space that is currently occupied for parking cars better

    Another big thing requires changing our diets. Some types of food are more resource intensive than others, but also we ship food all over the planet and the resources for transport also contributes. Eating food that is in season on your continent would make a big difference.

    The last thing is maybe the least obvious to regular people, but maybe we don’t need to build that data center yet if we can’t power it without fossil fuel. We need to entirely stop expanding energy usage until we’ve switched over entirely to sustainables.

    In summary, basically everything that needs to happen is going to affect regular people, and they’re going to have to get over it, or we’re going to make the planet completely unlivable.

  • cynar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Proviso of this is that, globally, politicians grow a spine, along with a sense of morality, and long term planning. It would also require them to deal with the money hoarding issues with the hyper rich.

    • The first step is a massive push for renewables. They should be representing 200-500% of grid demand regularly. If nuclear can get up to speed and be part of this, great, but we can’t wait on it.

    • That excess power should be soaked up by large scale, portable, energy storage. Green hydrogen is the current best option, but synthetic fossil fuels could also take up the slack. Depending on the area, desalination could also be combined into this.

    • We seriously decarbonise the transport networks. For vans and smaller, electric vehicles win. BYD have demonstrated that low cost electric cars are viable. For larger vehicles, where electric becomes inefficient, hydrogen is viable. This is where a lot of the excess hydrogen will be going.

    • Carbon credits with teeth. Rather than relying on a planned economy mindset, we can make capitalism work for us. We need a global fixed carbon emission limit. This limit should trend towards net zero on a preset timetable. Credits are bid on, akin to stock market trades. Companies must have credits by the end of the year/period. The fine for not having credits should be a multiple of the closing credits price (10x?). The fine for falsification should be multiples of that, erring towards corporate execution levels.

    This will force easy savings out of the market quickly. It will then force compulsory emitters to factor in Carbon costs.

    • Combined with the carbon credits will be negative credits. If a group takes a ton of CO² out of the air, long term, they gain a new credit. They can sell this to emitters. This will provide the CO² emissions industry requires, while meeting net zero.

    An example of this might be large scale bio capture on the open ocean. Grow seaweed etc on pontoons, and turn it into a solid. This can then be locked up (old coal mines?) taking carbon out permanently.

    • Geo engineering. There are multiple methods of reducing incident sunlight on the earth. Everything from powders in the upper atmosphere, to mylar solar shades at the Lagrange point. They will be short term fixes, but will buy us time.

    None of these require massive reductions in quality of life. They do require changes in how we do things. It’s also worth noting that I’ve not covered the numerous problems to be solved e.g. power grid upgrades to account for renewables. None of these should be insurmountable however, just engineering, or political/policing challenges.

    An no, I’ve no fucking idea how to get politicians to grow a spine and do what’s required for our long term comfort/survival. Fixing the planet? That’s just a (really big) engineering problem. Fixing human nature? …Fuck knows.

  • toiletobserver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s not everything obviously, but mandate that all people who can do their job from home must do their job from home. This will take a bite out of cars and improve general human morale.

    Eliminate carbon trading programs and just set hard limits. Went over your allocation of carbon? Guess you’re done for the quarter.

    Eliminate LLCs. Bring on the accountability.

  • TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    Tax billionaires out of existence, ban fossil fuels, invest in carbon capture, ban corporate greed, switch all solutions to the slightly more expensive, green alternative

  • python@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    I’m vegan, have no intention of ever buying a car and plan on never having children. That’s probably as much individual action as anyone can ask for. Anything after that is up to corporations and governments, so we should make sure they are incentivized to do the right thing 👍

  • Clbull@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    9 months ago

    Geoengineering: Whether through launching solar shades into space to block sunlight and cool the planet down, pump aerosols into the atmosphere, cloud seeding, or anything else. I think this is where our research should be going. I think it’s too late to avoid the worst-case-scenarios of climate change from merely cutting emissions, so more drastic measures to alleviate or even reverse the effects may be necessary. Plus it’ll help us with any future colonizing and terraforming of worlds outside of Earth.

    Public transport infrastructure to reduce our reliance on cars & planes: While I don’t think hyperloops or a transatlantic tunnel are feasible, building tens of thousands of kilometres worth of overground and underground railway routes to interconnect towns and cities with high speed maglev trains is. China have the right idea.

    Right to work from home: Remote working reduces our dependency on cars and frees up real estate to address the various housing crises we have.

    Right to repair and outlawing planned obsolescence: Should we have to buy a new smartphone every 3 or so years because Apple or Samsung want to maximize profits? Do we care at all about the amount of electronic waste we’re producing?

    Accelerate our efforts to reverse desertification and plant trillions more trees: If we can turn parts of the Sahel, Gobi Desert and the Australian outback green, that could have a very beneficial effect on the environment.

    • Goldholz @lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Oh hell no. Lets not fuck with nature even more. We must not play god! Geoengineering might cause more problems than its use!