With every solution, and even in the title of this newsletter itself, I emphasize the number one thing individuals can do that most of us are still not doing: talk about it! Use your voice to explain why climate change matters and to advocate for climate action.
Eat the rich and redistribute their assets
Support policies and legislation that targets industry.
Recognize that your individual efforts are less than a drop in the ocean next to industrial contributions.
Just love your life and try to be happy.
The top 10 most effective actions by The Week
(In no particular order)
- Join an initiative at your workplace or start one yourself.
- Join a group that does activism.
- Vote for the most ambitious climate candidates at all levels over the next 10 years.
- Buy everything second-hand.
- Switch to green energy providers.
- Insulate your home.
- Choose less meat, eat more plant-based foods.
- Shift your banking and investments to benefit the environment.
- Switch to public transportation, bike or electric car.
- Stop flying (or reduce it by 80%).
- Don’t have children
- Don’t build a house with concrete (incl foundation)
- Public transport and cycling
- No beef and minimize dairy products
Not having children doesn’t solve anything. That’s just an abandonment of the future. It directly harms people who need help - the elderly, those with disabilities and medical conditions, etc.
100% agreed. Suggesting “not having children” as the first best thing you can do is IMO lazy at best and eco-fascist at worst.
Not having children is an interesting topic I’d like to know more about. Do you have any good talks or lectures about it? I mean, we are on this planet because life propagates, it’s baked into the core of every living thing. I wouldn’t say we have to have kids, but it’s a driving force behind a lot of stuff that we do. And it is such a journey! I know kids emit co2, but to me, telling people not to have kids feels like giving up on hope and on life itself.
And I know earth is getting crowded, too. But the western world is not growing at all, other places do. So I’d say, let’s make life over there better and safer, so families over there don’t have to rely on children to look after them when the get old. Like Europe and the US did like a century ago.I probably should have phrased it as “have less children” :)
My list was based on the book “How Bad Are Bananas” which goes into depth about the carbon emissions from various things, including children.
I’m not 100% sure that attributing the emissions of a child to their parents is correct ‘accounting’. Maybe only their emissions until age 18? Still, all the emissions caused by that child and it’s descendants would not have happened if it wasn’t for the decision their parents made to create it. Accounted for this way, there is no doubt this is the most impactful decision someone in a developed country can make (that was the framing the OP used so I went with that) but it is not the most likely to happen, most practical or most moral option.
I think aiming for extinction is shortsighted and puts a lot of blame on humanity as a whole for the wrongs of colonialism.
But reducing our population, especially in countries with a larger carbon footprint (and not in developing countries as eco fascists would prefer) is a worthy goal.
Blaming humanity instead of blaming colonialism is the prevailing notion behind eco-fascism.
I was able to get a vasectomy in my 20s with no children. Not everyone has a cool doctor, so results may vary. And I know that it can be a lot more difficult for cis women to get surgical birth control.
We would completely solve the climate crisis in one generation if we all stopped having kids.
