To resent the cognitive dissonance that exists around climate change

I do. I don't follow fashion, much less fast fashion and couldn't give a shit. But i might be in the minority. I like kids wearing uniform in schools because you can rotate two sets and that's enough for 5 days of the week.

Much of that would have huge economic consequences.

EV cars and their battery manufacture is hugely environmentally damaging.

Yes, making clothing very expensive.

Most of what you suggest hit the poorest and thats the majority of the population.

But do people here really want that reduced?

I’d say doubtful

I've been to China and yes, when you're there you realise that very quickly.

@Nannyfannybanny If you kill off the cows, what happens to the farmers, they cannot all go over to arrible. They don't actually cause much methane.

This here is exactly the huge misunderstanding the general public have about the impact of meat and dairy farming.

Globally, farming uses about 70% of the planet’s accessible freshwater. It takes 15,500 litres of water to produce 1 kg beef, contrasted with 180 litres for 1 kg tomatoes and 250 litres for 1 kg potatoes. There is also the crucial issue of land use, animal farming requires crops to be grown to feed the animals when this could instead be directly used to feed people. Large swathes of forest are removed every year across the world to make more space to grow crops that are used for animal feed. In the amazon rainforest, 80% of deforested land is used for cattle grazing. 75% of the world’s agricultural land is used for raising animals – this includes animal feed, pasture and grazing. Then you consider the additional carbon emissions that are created, not only by the animals, but also the industry they are part of. Every year, over one billion chickens, 12 million turkeys, 13 million sheep and lambs, 10 million pigs, 2.7 million cows and 10 million ducks and geese are slaughtered in the UK for human consumption.

I agree, we haven't even began to recognise the real problem... exponential population growth.

Very hypothetically, if we stopped breeding tomorrow, within 20-30 years we (probably) wouldn't have a climate problem.

Ridiculous I know, but it illustrates how drastic a problem we have.

I’ve got one pair personally but that still doesn’t matter!

Agree; there's a lot we don't need. I've reduced meat, coffee and tea consumption and only try to buy in-season fruit and veg.
I will argue though that we don't 'need' AI, even though it's a revolution that is happening whether we like it or not, so we'll all soon be in a position where we'll have to use AI systems.

We buy from China. People have 30 pairs of trainers when 3 or 4 will do.

This. Most people know that what we do on an individual level will make zero difference to climate change.

Yep; many people will die. Probably not the rich ones, unfortunately. Did anyone here read Stark, by Ben Elton?

The planet will recover; humans may just about cling on; we may end up with Waterworld or First Contact. Personally I’d prefer the latter, especially if I manage to ‘Klingon’ 😅

I try to live small; but I also can’t be arsed anymore! Fuck’em.

These are very necessary things though.
There's plenty of things we could focus on that aren't as necessary.. meat consumption and mass farming is one in my view. I don't mean for everyone to go vegetarian.. just limits on imports, higher animal welfare standards, limits on how much supermarkets can stock and how cheaply it can be sold. There so much waste!! It's shocking when you look into it.
Supermarkets in general create so much waste. There should be some way to tackle this. Goods are being produced then thrown in the bin.

Pretending your actions don't matter is just an example of the cognitive dissonance

Governments don't act because the actions would be unpopular- look at how hard it is to get people out of cars in central London , how it's "war on the motorists " every time a restriction or cost is suggested

If government knew people were really behind change it would happen - but they know most people just pay lip service so they do too

If people really knew what the cost of this inaction and obstruction really would be -!if they could feel what the Californians are feeling now - perhaps they would thing differently

CoL is nothing to what is coming out way

Still it will get people out of cars and planes because you won't have the money for them
But too late

I think you can't blame people for buying cheap clothes from China if they are available.. and the government allows them to be available. People are struggling with the cost of living at the moment.
I hate to bring brexit into this but that's a part of it.. it's now cheaper to import goods from further away... goods of a lower quality that cause more pollution due to manufacturing and distance they are being transported.
We need countries working together but at the moment there's a very nationalistic shift...
Let's hope this government does some things right on a national level at least..
I'm excited to see efforts towards nationalising the railways for example. Things like this impact climate change.
I'd like to see more industry brought back to the UK and in state control.

As for hypocrisy, all of us internet users are very guilty as one of the worst CO2 offender is data. Cooling those mega data storage servers is one of the worst things for the planet. I believe air travel is much less than the total energy required by the internet which has doubled within the last couple of years. And AI will make that thousandfold because it runs on very large amounts of data... [edited for accuracy]

My sister in the US has 4 cars. One for each member of her family.. No option because there is zero public transport.

The richest country in the world relies on 1 cars per person. Why would you expect a person in Nigeria to not even buy their first car?

When it comes to environmental impact every one is a hypocrite, which is just a fact as it’s almost impossible to live in our current society without having a significant negative environmental impact.

People get fixated on recycling which is almost irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, the best thing an individual can do to reduce their carbon footprint is to follow a predominately plant based diet but that requires what many view as a sacrifice they are unwilling to make.

It can be easy to think ‘well my eating meat is such a tiny proportion’ or ‘I really need a holiday and the flights only 5hrs’. People can make conscious choices that do have a positive impact but ultimately it comes down to governments implementing laws that force companies to take the more environmentally conscious choice and at the minute that’s not happening. There is a lot misunderstanding from the public and until individuals feel the direct impact they are disinclined to make choices that are more difficult. By then it will be too late.

The cognitive dissonance so far as I’m concerned lies with the people who believe that tiny things we do like recycling etc in the UK worthy as they are, will make any significant difference whatsoever to the climate change risk - because while China, US and some developing economies continue to emit pollutants on an industrial scale, very little we do in our tiny country will make a difference.

I believe that the only thing that will help is the development of technologies to counteract or ameliorate climatic issues. People won’t make radical changes to their lifestyles.

I would never holiday in Dubai because of its human rights record. But in all honesty this isn't really me being 'righteous', or because I think my not holidaying there will improve human rights in the place. It's because the poor human rights record means I think I would enjoy a holiday elsewhere more.

I suspect this explains the apparent contradiction: people are able to wear cheap clothes from China without thinking about the human rights of the workers who made them. But if you're driving through Dubai seeing stark contrasts of wealth, it's harder to ignore.

Nothing is going to change unless it's done at a legal level and aimed at businesses and is a worldwide endeavour.
You want to blame a family using an aeroplane to see the world once a year?? We should be able to do this.. it's important. Aeroplane use is important.
What's not important is mass producing plastic tat, or raising then murdering thousands of cows that don't get eaten just chucked straight in the bin, so supermarket freezers look full.
Public transport should be nationalised.. imports should be considered luxury.. poverty in this country should be addressed so that people didn't need to rely on cheap mass produced goods and food.. and most of all BUSINESSES SHOULD BE LEGALLY REGULATED.

you can ban plastic straws and bags all you like but it's just a gimmick. Putting responsibility in the hands of individuals just feeds into all this capitalist nonsense. Until we work together on a grand scale it's going to have no effect
You can't buy your way out of climate change.. you can't blame ordinary people flying on easyjet.. all of this is just placing guilt on people so that billionaires can continue exploitation.

Whatever we do as individuals is pretty pointless. Most of the climate lobby are middle class types with time on their hands.

The Earth has always been changing. We've only been here for a very short time.

Two WHOLE books, ay 😆

I think the real issue is the lack of joined-up thinking and in the case of disasters, bad management overall. What I mean by that: it's really hard to get a full overview of what the real CO2 impact of a product is - and other environmental impact. For example, the electric car emits no particles or CO2 however if you think of all the crap that goes into producing its batteries, the human cost of mining those rare earth minerals (they don't come from countries with great human rights records, to say the least), and the total CO2 footprint that goes into producing them, I'm not convinced they're such a win for the planet. (This is a question by the way, I'd love to hear from knowledgeable posters that they are a great solution, but I'm personally not sure).
The other issue with the environment is that it's never just one thing. Usually disasters are a combination of climate factors like more extreme weather patterns and national and local government failures, and sometimes corporate greed as well. The LA fires are a prime example: there's awful drought in Southern California so the vegetation is extremely dry but this time last year they also had unprecedented floods following another very dry patch. So, clearly weather patterns are getting unpredictable. Yet, vegetation hasn't been managed properly for years, fire departments saw cuts at local authority level, and the human cost will be compounded by exorbitant insurance costs which means less well off people will have lost everything because they weren't properly covered. It's one example among many happening in the world. Look at the Spanish floods a couple of months ago and their toll, or Mayotte and the recent devastating hurricane. There's always a mix of nature getting more unpredictable and human lack of foresight/bad or insufficient resources. It's very complex and I don't see how we can improve things unless there's a real sense of international, national and corporate responsibility. Otherwise we'll all drown, burn and/or starve...

Lol. You could say things like the pandemic are nature's way of population reduction. But humans do all they can to fight it Along with fighting nature keeping the very ill alive at all costs