• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      601 year ago

      Apart from the voting which is above all else, if you REALLY want to do something on an individual basis, you should reduce your meat or become a vegetarian. It seems that’s what experts claim has the biggest impact. Apart from that, don’t have children, or 2 at most.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          The bulk of those companies are in the energy business and they respond to consumer demand. Chevron isn’t out there drilling, extracting, refining, and burning oil for no reason.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            They will respond faster to heavy regulations/taxation, national policy shifts towards renewable energies, fossil fuel bans and nationalisation/forced liquidation.

            No individual is their primary customer, and doesn’t have the negotiating power to affect them, they are effectively Mega corps, and immune even to certain national laws.

            Vote for a government that will affect them, the other meaningful option (for individuals) is sabotage/Eco-terrorism, which isn’t really a long-term solution.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          When the parties on offer are various flavours of neoliberalism, as in most capitalist countries these days, it doesn’t give you any options that will make a difference quick enough. They simply can’t do what needs to be done within that economic framework.

          That said, vote for the least worst one. But the most significant things have to be done outside of that electoral framework, because it can’t resist the demands of short-term profit.

      • Bipta
        link
        fedilink
        591 year ago

        Please don’t have children. Think about the life you’re condemning them to.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        291 year ago

        If we don’t have children because we care for our planet, we leave the world to those who don’t care at all. Not sure if this is the right decision.

        • JackGreenEarth
          link
          fedilink
          English
          141 year ago

          Same with atheism, religious people have more children, so the religious population is increasing, despite people deconverting.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          Honestly, I haven’t thought of it like that. I guess that’s a decent point. But having more than 2 children, and you are part of the problem.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            My family had one kid. So we went from I believe seven grandparents and great aunts and uncles down to one child just within two generations!

            At this rate my family could depopulate the whole planet in no time.

            Also a friend of mine just told me that he met a lady who had 22 siblings so…

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                01 year ago

                who are you saying shouldn’t have children? whose children are you proposing to teach to care for the planet?

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  I never said anyone shouldn’t have children.

                  whose children are you proposing to teach to care for the planet?

                  children up for adoption

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    I never said anyone shouldn’t have children.

                    you’re right, but the conversation was definitely about eugenics propaganda. if you’re not saying “don’t have children” then i really apologize, but the tone of the conversation seemed to be “don’t have kids. you can adopt instead!”

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    11 year ago

                    so you’ll adopt them and brainwash them into an ideology. it just doesn’t have a good ring.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        101 year ago

        Why vegetarian, not vegan? Cows are a major contributor to the emissions, and people tend to increase their dairy consumption when going vegetarian.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Going vegetarian doesn’t seem to be the most impactful when you look at the numbers, as per this video. Vegan diets still have the lowest GHG footprint and GWP of all diets.

        That being said, I went vegetarian first before going vegan. So your point is entirely valid.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          Honestly I wasn’t aware the difference is that big. I thought cows were bad mostly for the meat, but apparently milk is at least as bad. 🤥

          That sucks. ☹️

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            If you want to see what the heck veganism is about compared to vegetarianism, check this resource out.

            But yeah! Leather is also bad for the same reason, contributing to the same industry. There are alternatives out there so don’t feel bad!

            One step at a time, like you’ve mentioned in your other comments.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -31 year ago

        reduce your meat or become a vegetarian

        i’m dubious about this. don’t get me wrong: i try to make sure at least half my calories come from soylent. i’m saying i have looked at the methodology, and it doesn’t seem sound. HAVING READ THE RELEVANT STUDIES it’s not clear to me that the researchers are even drawing correct conclusions.

        here’s an example that i think can be extrapolated across many data points: cotton seed. first, cotton is grown for textiles. like, exclusively. like, the only reason to grow cotton is for textiles. BUT you can increase the profits from your cotton harvest if you sell the seed to cattle operations. so cattle are fed cottonseed. then the water and land-use costs of cotton get rolled into the costs of raising cattle. but that’s nonsensical. cottonseed is purely waste product, and giving it to cattle CONSERVES resources.

        soybeans are another thing altogether, and the complexity of the whole agricultural system implies, to me at least, that maybe it’s not so simple as “reduce your meat intake”.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          I must admit it’'s not super intuitive to me either, but it seems the consensus is pretty strong among experts, and I haven’t taken the time to really delve in deep on the issue.

          But apparently a significant part of the problem is that cows make a lot of methane, that is a very bad greenhouse gas, and when it breaks down it’s to CO2 which is still a greenhouse gas. So kind of a bad double dip as I understand it.

    • Montagge
      link
      fedilink
      411 year ago

      There are no peaceful ways to make a difference. Change my mind.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          21 year ago

          You seem like more of a mauve hajji, if I’m being honest. You’re definitely a fall.

          See if that rpg comes in teal and ooh girl

          chefs kiss

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Depends on your definition of peaceful. Industrial sabotage that specifically targets unmanned equipment would still be peaceful by my definition, for example.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        201 year ago

        This, it’s the only thing that really counts, we all need to pull together, the only way to do that, is to vote in politicians that actually give a shit.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            161 year ago

            Oh boy not the false equivalence again. If you don’t give a shit yourself then don’t vote.

            It makes a difference who gets the power, and your main influence is your power to vote.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I always do vote for the party with most proactive views on climate change.

              I just feel really jaded that they are going to make much of a difference, short term capitalistic gains seem more important to all

              Edit - I’m also beginning to feel that voting isn’t my most powerful move. Disruptive protests are looking better and better.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                71 year ago

                Voting is the absolute smallest political action anyone could ever take. Protest always has been and always will be more effective at moving the needle. Above all else these ghouls want to preserve capitalism. If it looks like the only way they preserve capitalism in the near term is capitulating to the demands of environmentalists then that is what will happen. Of course in the long term capitalists will attempt to erode these gains just like they have done with social safety nets in various countries for largely the same reasons (increased rate of profit).

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                You’re right, voting isn’t the most powerful thing you can do.

                It’s getting involved in politics altogether, getting more people to vote.

                And not “We got the president and maybe a senator” vote. The crowd that’s fighting climate change every step of the way has infested all the way down to the local levels making it harder to vote on the national platforms. I’d say this is a US thing, but if there’s voting, they seem to be infesting all of it.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                It may not be the most powerful for all, but for most it is.

                Just don’t go along with something like Just Stop Oil, that’s not constructive or helpful in any way, and it’s off-putting for the vast majority tiring people of the issue, rather than waking their interest.

          • vrojak
            link
            fedilink
            141 year ago

            Yes, some that really give a shit might not be a part of a major party in whatever country you live in, but even among established parties there are people who are more inclined to do something about the climate catastrophe than others.

    • genoxidedev1
      link
      fedilink
      281 year ago

      Honestly, I’m pretty sure the deficit we could create on an individual basis will just be used by companies instead, so I’m just gonna agree with the others on voting being the most effective method of making a difference.

    • darq
      link
      fedilink
      81 year ago

      As others have said, voting is important. But also I’d guess that direct action will play a large role in the next few decades.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Some changes people (in the US or elsewhere) might want to check into:

      • See if your local electric utility has Green Power programs where you can elect to have your power come from renewables (via credits) for 2-5% of your bill/month extra
      • If you own a home, consider making switches to more electrified stuff like: induction cookstoves v. natural gas, heat pumps v. AC units, power tools that have batteries and/or cables v. gasoline or diesel, adding solar panels to your roof or property (only costs ~$20k these days), etc.
      • Start moving your pensions or stocks into greener index funds, or even consider adopting banks and credit unions that publicly disclose which projects and companies they invest your dollar in
      • Consider buying your groceries from local farmer’s markets or farms that have mail-to-your-door programs (aka CSAs or Community Supported Agriculture programs); this is a good resource to learn more about the farms near you
      • Switch to non-red meat diets, and then after that switch to a vegetarian diet, and then after that switch to a vegan diet (all while consulting health professionals); this is a good resource on vegan diets if anyone is curious
      • Consider choosing a Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV; 100% electric) or a Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV; 50/50 electric/gas) as your new car; this resource can steer you in the right direction
      • Vote in primary elections where candidates prioritize climate action, then vote for them again in general elections when the time comes; this is a good resource to stay up on current civic events
      • Buy clothing/shoes used, or if you need to buy new, look for the GOTS and OEKO-TEX labels to make sure what you’re buying is organic, is ethical, and doesn’t pollute local environments of where your clothes/shoes are made
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -61 year ago

      Don’t procreate. Or if you do just yeet the baby into a furnace to skip a few steps, same outcome really.