Comment on Over 1,600 Scientists and Professionals Sign ‘No Climate Emergency’ Declaration
glimse@lemmy.world 6 months ago
CLINTEL was founded by an engineer from Shell and a journalist. They want to be a watchdog for climate science but they’ve already publicly made up their minds that climate change is not a problem.
The supposed-scientists who signed it did so using a form on their website. CLINTEL reviews signatures but does not reach out to vet the signers.
Another fun fact: The last time they asked people to sign this declaration, it was found that only 10 of the 500 signatures claimed to be climate scientists
Conclusion: I could not give less of a fuck about the climate opinions of an organization with ties to the oil/gas industry. It’s about as credible as the UAE saying they’re pushing for green energy
airrow@hilariouschaos.com 6 months ago
So I don’t think man-made climate change is really an issue or a thing but (ironically) I like the environment
so my question is more what do you think should be done to help the environment?
glimse@lemmy.world 6 months ago
Clean energy. Green energy storage.
Pollution from oil and gas fucks the environment pretty hard even if you pretend it isn’t affecting the climate.
airrow@hilariouschaos.com 6 months ago
Ok so like how can the world transition to clean / green energy, got any info or thoughts?
Are you advocating for a massive reduction in consumption in order to be totally green?
Do you think this will be adopted naturally inevitably at some point when clean / green energy becomes affordable?
I’ve seen some people post complaints that lithium is often mined with slave labor and isn’t sustainable (we can’t recycle it yet). So is there a better thing we should use instead of that?
Can this destruction be mitigated?
glimse@lemmy.world 6 months ago
I’m not advocating for anything as I’m not a climate scientist…but then again, most people on this CLINTEL declaration aren’t, either.
I think green energy would have already had mass-adoption if not for the lobbyists in oil and gas industries. It’s no secret they’ve been fighting the inevitable for decades in order to keep raking in the dough as their profits rely on control of the source energy…and the sun and wind are free so they don’t like it.
Yes there are tons of ways to store energy without lithium. Sand batteries and pumped hydro storage are continually proven successful. Lithium mining is an environmental concern but it pales in comparison
No, the destruction from oil/gas cannot be truly mitigated to any meaningful degree. It can be reduced but never eliminated…and even then, the industry is known to lie about it. Look no further than the chasm between their self-reported emissions and actual emissions.
jwelch55@lemmy.world 6 months ago
How could you possibly not believe it’s a thing…?
What should be done for the environment? Stop dependence on fossil fuels, stop dependence on plastics, stop capitalism’s push for ‘unsustainable constant and continued growth’ for starters maybe
airrow@hilariouschaos.com 6 months ago
I guess the question is why do you believe it (man-made climate change) is a thing?
we observe climates changing. There are however a lot of variables so it’s hard to tell what’s causing it (may not be manmade).
an alternative theory assuming man-made climate change is real: “they” are purposely creating changes to the climate, then offering destructive solutions. Maybe then we could cut out their destructive solutions as well as the causes?
I guess I view pollution as an actionable thing we can point to that is real and causes problems: microplastics being places, emissions from various industrial machines, spills like in East Palestine last year. There are often concrete remedies to those: using less plastics like you say (or biodegradable ones?), making machines with better emissions, reducing use of machines, improve safety protocols to prevent spills.
“Climate change” is kind of vague and it’s not clear what the actionable problem is to solve.
For example, “carbon emissions” was identified as a problem. And the solution then was planting a bunch of trees to capture the carbon. And now one guy has backpedaled on that plan and says we shouldn’t plant so many trees:
wired.com/…/stop-planting-trees-thomas-crowther/
So, when people say “manmade climate change is a problem” do they really just mean “carbon emissions are a problem”? Some other people have said carbon emissions are not a problem: usnews.com/…/scientist-carbon-dioxide-doesnt-caus…
Seems like most people want to grow and that’s ok. It’s mostly a question of what happens when the oil runs out I guess, if that’s possible. I guess it’s just a question of what sustainability is and how much sustainability is needed.