Re:Scientists Identify How Many Trees to Plant and Where to ...
by scarejunba on Monday September 30, 2019 @01:26PM
(#21117659)
I have an SUV, eat meat every day, and fly once a month. I am carbon negative through TerraPass. The solution doesn't need lifestyle change for those who can pay to offset. It needs lifestyle change from the rest.
Re:Scientists Identify How Many Trees to Plant and Where to ...
by Legogris on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @12:53AM
(#21122153)
So it's OK to crap in the street if you pick enough litter that you're now poo-negative? Carbon emissions is not the only major climate impact from the things you mention and it's not about "paying your dues" as an individual.
Re:Scientists Identify How Many Trees to Plant and Where to ...
by scarejunba on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @02:54AM
(#21122675)
I'm not listening to some carbon positive individual lecture me. Fix your house first.
Re:Scientists Identify How Many Trees to Plant and Where to ...
by megaremote on Monday September 30, 2019 @09:44PM
(#21121248)
If you are driving a car you are destroying our planet.
Re:Scientists Identify How Many Trees to Plant and Where to ...
by scarejunba on Tuesday October 01, 2019 @02:54AM
(#21122669)
Nah, you're doing worse than I am unless you're carbon negative too. My car is fully offset and all marginal stuff is offset too.
2. They are proven to reduce your impact at a level that most consider manageable
3. The other poster said AND - eat less meat AND get involved in other mechanisms for change
I dont have any interest in virtue or signalling: i just want people to impact the planet less so we dont trigger any unwanted changes. Is that a valid enough reason to ask everyone to try their best or do we keep having to have philosophical arguments about how individual free choice (shaped often by the corporations themselves!) trumps any imperative to collectively sacrifice?