I think in general the environmental movement has been hurt by the association with austerity. Most people don't like being told their lives have to get worse for a benefit that's difficult to see. It needs to paint a positive vision of the future that people can get excited about.
This exactly. Most people respond better to carrots than sticks. We can consume less energy and material and still live more, through innovation.
Traveling less would do more, or using more public transport. Bulk transit of non-food goods is very energy efficient, the last mile is not.
See website Without Hot Air as a rough but thorough analysis.
Air conditioning as a luxury to rethink, OTOH, rarely if ever comes into discussion around here (I'm writing from a Mediterranean perspective, obviously AC can quickly become a necessity elsewhere).
Sourcing: https://www.sciencenews.org/article/climate-deadly-extreme-t...
Counterintuitive though.
The story gets even better if any solar, wind, or hydro is used. Sure nuclear helps as well. Seems obvious to me that we should push on all green energies.
How can we do that when overall population is still growing (even if the rate of growth is slowing). I mean, even if I cut my consumption by 25%, there are so many new people that it doesn’t seem like it would matter much?
If we scale up this mind set and suddenly produce 100x Increase in electric cars and nuclear plants, wouldn’t we see a massive spike in air pollution much more than if we simply had 0 production of these?
I’ve been very skeptical of “produce more green energy” solution because they seem to pile on more problems under the guise that it is better in the long run.
Isn’t the best ultimate solution to consume less? Fewer cars, fewer things.