Not that I find it in any way objectionable myself, but Iād say that in a very literal sense itās not safe for work. At least if you work for a corporation or similar type of soulless entity š
I havenāt yet been convinced that giving up meat can help. Specifically, I havenāt seen the question of what happens to the grazing land.
If it is left to burn, the carbon it contains cycles grass ā”ļø fire ā”ļø CO2, particles ā”ļø grass, etc
If itās left to rot itās grass ā”ļø methane, CO2 ā”ļø grass
If it is rewilded the carbon cycles grass ā”ļø meat, methane ā”ļø predators, etc
If left as it is itās the same, but with us in place of the predators.
I really feel like there is no way of preventing the carbon emissions of grasslands, but at least if theyāre making meat for us we can work on engineering a way out of the methane release, and people are working on that
And at worst itās not fossil carbon, itās renewable, the carbon emitted is captured again when the grass regrows
Thereās carbon in the farm equipment, but thatās the same in all farming
Grass fed cattle and corn fed cattle have very different impacts on the environment. āMeatless Mondaysā to me says āeat less meatā which in turn means more money for āGrass-Fed Steak Fridaysā.
Listen Iām a proud liberal L and Iām glad that the liberal supreme court protected L marriage. Iām also about as far left as you can get but these days the Zās are being ridiculous. They donāt understand how good they have it, and how they should be grateful and patient for their day to come. Making trouble in the party just puts Lās like me at risk again and we donāt want that. Oh and donāt get me started on those fucking Tās
Proud owner of a 1993 Toyota Corolla, can confirm. It has little paint or primer left. Thatās stealth. There are holes in the roof sealed with silicone, making it perfect forā¦activities. No rust. You cannot make this pristine Christine stop running.
90s: corporations make everything plastic and disposable while people are told to recycle
Itās worse than that: the plastics industry tells us to recycle ā even going so far as to plagiarize the recycling symbol into the resin identification codes ā despite knowing from the beginning that recycling plastic was mostly never going to be a viable thing. They did this purely to shift blame to consumers because the only way their business model worked was to not be held accountable for their waste.
Recycling was actively brought forward as a solution by the oil companies to push the blame of plastic use onto consumers.
So while recycling rare metals is always valuable, plastic is definitely not. Almost all plastic gets buried in landfills, and the only way to make this not happen is to not make products with plastics.
By creating and marketing plastic recycling as a solution that the consumers must take onto themselves, it allowed them to rake in profits by moving everything to cheap plastic alternatives.
We are now literally made of microplastics as a result.
What I donāt understand is why burning plastic waste and using the generated heat (for example for district heating) is not discussed more often. I think recycling offers very little benefit over simple burning of plastics due to the amount of oil still being burned everywhere compared to the amount of oil used for plastic production.
I guess Iām surprised we donāt do it but we all know that burning plastic is gonna end up directly in the lungs of some poor people who have to live by the pollution factory
If you donāt need to, donāt produce something. Chocolates donāt need to be all individually wrapped inside of yet another wrapper. Transport should be mostly by public and active transport (though we also need better city planning to help enable this), and private motor vehicles can, at this point, mostly be converted to the less-polluting EVs. That kind of thing.
If itās been produced, rather than throwing it away, find ways to reuse it. Coke should be taking in glass bottles, washing them, and putting more coke back in it, rather than producing new bottles all the time.
If something has been produced and cannot be reused, we should try to find ways to recycle it. Youāre right that recycling is bad, but thatās mainly true of plastics. Glass and paper are far more easy to recycle, if collected effectively. Which is also why the move from glass and paper products to plastic is such an environmental disaster, brought on because companies donāt want to spend the larger cost of producing those products, or collecting them in to effectively recycle the glass.
This is absolutely right. Itās reductive of me to say that recycling is bad for the environment; intentionally reductive.
People generally have a very hard time absorbing the fact that plastic recycling is a scam, so itās hard to start nuanced to actually get the point across.
But you definitely nailed it. I would argue that if it was reduce, reuse, revolt, the environment would be in a much better place.
Yet, in the old days the only path to success was through shoving straight into a hole. Now a days (while having a Tetris 99 orgy) you have your T spins and your combos and your double T spins. Itās a T agenda conspiracy!
This doesnāt make sense. I keep getting told communism donāt like the gays so communism is bad and capitalism is good because you get to have cars and 1000 types of Hershey candy bars.
lemmy.ml
Hot