Comment on Made Ya Look...
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 day agoYes, but without fossil fuel inputs humanity couldn’t sustain 8 billion people, renewable energy or not.
My point is that humanity is heading into a foundational tree chipper. Don’t you think we’re already seeing signs of unraveling?
Of course humanity can survive on renewable energy, that’s how we built the Pyramids, but those civilizations didn’t have 8 billion people shopping on Aliexpress or spray cheese on nachos to watch the football game.
I think your argument is sound if the goal is to sustain current living standards in developed nations
But perhaps we should be evaluating whether, if those living standards require such an oppressive system, it may be better for us in these wealthy nations to learn how to do without
Not easy, not even likely, but necessary if we want to have a planet for future generations
head_socj@midwest.social 1 day ago
I also agree with you that it’s unraveling. But that’s why’d I’d rather try to adapt now and face the reality than pretend I can have Amazon Prime and not participate in killing life on Earth.
HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 day ago
Oh, agree. But how many people do you think we can sustain your way globally in the coming decades? We are projected to reach 10 billion by 2050 by some estimates.
head_socj@midwest.social 1 day ago
I’d argue we’re already in overshoot as far as carrying capacity, if we’re using current standards of living in the West as the baseline. In that sense, population decline is inevitable.
Its impossible for me to answer the question you’re asking, but I posit this: at this point, what is the alternative? Can we keep affording to slow-walk actionable solutions to climate change? What are the wealthy nations of the world willing to sacrifice to sustain Earth’s future as our home? How will we decide who and what to preserve, and who and what is worth losing?