

That’s helpful. These estimates do tend to vary a bit depending on assumptions (type of plane or car, what occupancy etc). The 2t I quoted was slightly high. My point was that there’s no other way to emit 1 tonne in 6 hours.
European. Contrarian liberal. Insufferable green. History graduate. I never downvote opinions. Low-effort comments with vulgarity or snark will be (politely) ignored.
That’s helpful. These estimates do tend to vary a bit depending on assumptions (type of plane or car, what occupancy etc). The 2t I quoted was slightly high. My point was that there’s no other way to emit 1 tonne in 6 hours.
Apart from the methane problem, all livestock farming takes, by definition, a massive amount more land than arable farming to produce the same amount of food. On a stressed planet of 9 billion people, there simply is not enough land to feed everyone with red meat.
First, well done for taking it seriously and doing your bit.
The point of the post (I think) is simply to illustrate that certain actions are much, much more important than others. Anecdotally, there are still plenty of people out there who believe that, say, turning off a couple of (low-energy) lights, or “recycling” a plastic bag, are somehow major good deeds that allow them to kick their feet up and celebrate with a steak. There’s still way too much ignorance about all this, IMO.
In reality (as you seem to understand), some gestures are far more important than others. Ditching red meat (and dairy) really is a big deal. Everyone who claims to care about this problem should at least consider doing it.
This is a nice articulation of nihilism.
The paradox being that the attitude is both justified and… certain to only make the problem worse.
lasts much longer which is important as a single household
This is an often-overlooked argument for veganism. If you plan carefully, you literally don’t need a fridge.
Roughly true, but you’re eliding a very, very problematic activity into “travel”: aviation.
Per kilometer, flying is pretty carbon intensive (about the same as driving - basically: the extra efficiency of being packed into a tin can is offset by exponentially higher wind resistance at high speed). The problem is that airplanes allow you to burn up massive distances really quickly.
A single transatlantic flight will blow a 2-ton1-ton hole in your personal carbon footprint. That’s 10-20% of an average European’s annual footprint - or 100% a very large chunk of a sustainable annual footprint. For anyone who flies more than once a year (i.e. likely a bunch of people here), cutting down on flying is likely to be the single biggest thing you can do for the climate.
Wonderful story! Thanks for sharing.
in places like France and Japan
This is completely wrong.
You talk exclusively about Japan, so even if your anecdata is representative, then my point is not “completely” wrong. Let’s begin by using language correctly.
Yep exactly. At first I had trouble believing it was working without a connection, but it really does. This is definitely a case of AI being useful.
Pretty convincing arguments. Thanx.
Tells you that you can take your social media back from big tech then casually recommends Bluesky. Gimme a break.
I generally agree but I still feel it’s important to keep some perspective. Bluesky is not the solution but it’s definitely progress compared to existing corporate platforms (because it has real fundamental differences - several articles posted here went into detail about this).
IMO the best argument against Bluesky is that it will suck up the oxygen for other, better, solutions. That’s a fair theory but it seems to me that there’s plenty of market share to go round right now. Everyone is still on the evil corporate platforms.
RSS still exists and it’s still beautiful.
Agree, I use it every day.
Using WhoBird here. Similar functionality but open-source (so spyware-free). Available on F-Droid.
One thing I’ve learned is how many blackcaps I had been overlooking. Beautiful song, like a blackbird, but I’m finding it oddly hard to eyeball them.
I’ll be honest, a quick review of this thread did not clearly reveal who was downvoting who for what. My position, and this other person’s, is that downvoting opinions is bad manners and toxic to healthy discussion. If there was genuinely harmful advice there, then OK, downvote away.
(Obviously these days the word “harmful” is thrown around liberally so this probably just puts us back to square one.)
Freedom of speech as an absolute
Of course it’s not absolute, where did I say otherwise? Straw man.
paradox of tolerance
This just feels like a fancy reference deployed to back up intolerance.
Exactly my point. The virtual equivalent of taping someone’s mouth shut because you happen not to agree with what they say.
Their original staff was a bunch of pretty serious journalists sourced from the BBC.
Similar to: chough
It’s a type of bird but good luck knowing how to pronounce it. Ahh, English.
deleted by creator
A few years ago I considered learning Greek. Abandoned the plan because Greek has the triple whammy:
So: good luck.
Looks like a cross between a sparrow and a coal tit. What it is?