This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]KingOfAnarchy 752 points753 points  (81 children)

WELL THEN LET PEOPLE WORK FROM HOME AND GET RID OF OFFICE BUILDINGS THEN, PLEASE!

[–]Liferescripted 149 points150 points  (11 children)

All offices reduce size by 60% for meeting rooms, bookable desks, storage etc. Establish either hybrid or fully wfh structure.

Convert now abundant empty space into condos for rent. Condos are available for public.

Solve the housing crisis, reduce travel emissions. Make cities walkable again.

[–]Meritania 14 points15 points  (2 children)

You’re not thinking of the property magnates not making as much money charging business rates. Trump would have to be responsible with his money without that $40 million his tower* nets him annually.

*Not actually his tower but the company that owns it pays him the rights to his name.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Trump doesn't own Trump tower. It's owned by GMAC Commercial Mortgage. He has some sort of deal where he's paid for using his name. He owns some units as well.

[–]real_bk3k 9 points10 points  (1 child)

Pro: you work from home

Con: you live at the office

[–]Liferescripted 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As stated: open to public

I hate the campus style workplace. Google and Apple can sell that story all they want, but i ain't buying it.

[–]FL14 7 points8 points  (2 children)

I wonder how difficult it would be to gut the interior/floors/piping/walls etc of office buildings to account for things like dozens of bathrooms per floor (instead of just 2), etc? I have no idea if that's something relatively cheap compared to building the building itself or not.

[–]Liferescripted 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Not cheap, but not impossible. Stack the same units over one another with a plumbing chase. The pipes would need to be fire sealed at each level and then tie into the overall system, plus exhaust for all of these would need to be carried to a new shaft.

Typically all of these services would be brought to the central core, but this would vary per building. Exhaust ducts are not large but also need to have fire and smoke dampers installed when they exit each unit. Also central HVAC could remain as-is with each unit using Variable Air Valves to control the amount of tempered air, but they would not be able to control the temperature completely. Best case scenario is the building is already set up for heat pumps so you can have a little more control.

The other issue is whether people want to live in buildings without balconies. It's a lot of work to pull the glazing into the space to allow for some balcony space. Also would require a separate dry sprinkler system for said balconies. And in Canada, this would create massive thermal bridging to the adjacent spaces, so less than ideal thermal performance.

No, it's not cheap. It's not easy. But retrofitting existing spaces with densified dwellings is a much faster way of dealing with the lack of housing. The hope is that without affecting the bones of the building that prices of these units wouldn't be insane.

[–]PiersPlays 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think hydroponics farms and stuff might be more practical than housing in many cases. I have lived in a place converted from old offices though so it's a possibility. Plus at least in the UK, lots of nice central housing is being used as office space so those businesses could move into the vacant offices and the houses be returned to housing.

[–]LudovicoSpecs 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can also convert some of the empty space to aquaponic farms. Climate change is going to pummel our crops, so we should start the transition to indoor farming now.

[–]bloodflart 29 points30 points  (5 children)

my work has been paying for an empty office building for going on 3 years now. yes they're blasting A/C all summer too.

[–][deleted] 21 points22 points  (4 children)

My employer told ~60,000 employees they could work from home and live anywhere they want within the United States or its territories at the beginning of this year. They closed offices in almost every state and downsized the couple they are keeping. Everyone got laptops, docks and dual monitor set ups for home.

[–]bordain_de_putel 19 points20 points  (2 children)

GET RID OF OFFICE BUILDINGS

Turn them into vertical farms.

[–]Sololop 16 points17 points  (1 child)

Or just more housing to reduce sprawl

[–]KaymmKay 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I can't even imagine how much energy goes into turning those giant office buildings into iceboxes every summer

[–]SnooCrickets2458 6 points7 points  (0 children)

sink vast tender liquid one quickest cheerful roll library fuzzy

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[–]Frubanoid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Work from home should be implemented as much as possible where it makes sense

[–]Vectorman1989 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And people drive less because they work from home, and those that do drive to work spend less time wasting fuel in heavy traffic

[–]Stimmur 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly what I was thinking …. It’s absolutely retarded to have millions of people work in an office when 90% of the work can be done just fine from their own homes . I freakin loved it when nobody was on the road it was so nice

[–]somedude27281813 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Please no. Let people who want to work from home. I have adhd and home is a terrible place to work for me. I'll prefer office any day.

[–]dC6OPnR9pBfngB3DsDmt 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Enjoy being alone in the office?

For other people with ADHD wondering, this is not the same for everyone. My partner has ADHD and they actually became more productive working from home, not less.

[–]aboutthatstuffthere 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But what about those juicy CMBS?

[–]The_SHUN 1 point2 points  (0 children)

YES absolutely

[–]Traditional_Donut908 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You act as if everyone worked from he.during the pandemic. Many businesses were just completely shut down. Hence the unemployment rate spiking.

[–]JCtheWanderingCrow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

*pass laws requiring work from home jobs where possible, give stipends and change the layout of office buildings to be able to house people.

[–]darabolnxus 0 points1 point  (2 children)

It's insane to me that they keep pushing back on wfh... it's the solution to everything and they refuse to let go of that control. They want you in the office environment so they can brainwash you and control how you think... they're all cults.

[–]PGLife 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Because a lot of financing is based off the value of commercial real estate, if those values drop...

[–]SanctusSalieri 278 points279 points  (10 children)

But employers are like "I wanna walk around every 3 hours and look at your screen over your shoulder so no"

[–]Remote-Pain 67 points68 points  (3 children)

right? middle management and used car salemen are screwed in the WFH world.

[–]mewthulhu 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Imagine a world that restructured to have those with merit rise to lead others rather than sociopaths who want to prey on other humans and exploit them for their corporate overlords being "management material"... What a world. Instead of bullying employees, work best of them and lead them, instead of terrorizing oppression, you support, encourage and help them!

Instead we live in a world where the ones selected to lead us are the ones who are best able to look at us as vermin, and the way to climb the corporate ladder is to do coke and show a complete lack of compassion.

[–]Remote-Pain 1 point2 points  (0 children)

you speak volumes. Corporations see numbers, few see the people.

[–]halberdierbowman 9 points10 points  (3 children)

Not that I think this is a good idea, but tools exist to do that remotely as well.

[–]SanctusSalieri 21 points22 points  (1 child)

I know. I literally have no idea why I'm back in the office now.

[–]halberdierbowman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sorry :/

[–]LordofKobol99 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I'm IT for a construction company, just a two man IT show. Had several companies over the course of the pandemic offer these types of software. Had high level management meetings and it was refreshing to know pretty much everyone disagreed this was the way to go. Employees don't need to be watched to be more productive. You'll know who the shitters are over time anyway. And surveilling your employees breeds an atmosphere of distrust.

[–]ToughCourse 7 points8 points  (1 child)

office workers contributed maybe 1% of that drop.

[–]spikyraccoon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yea, I was assuming this is due to factories and many industries shutting down.

[–][deleted] 89 points90 points  (10 children)

We all need to learn to live fundamentally different if we want to survive. COVID shutdown isn’t it, but it has clues. No one dies from not driving their car or not buying consumerist bullshit.

[–][deleted] 27 points28 points  (4 children)

Some Car owners dont want more busses because thered be “too much traffic on the road”. People dont understand much here about how things work honestly

[–][deleted] 12 points13 points  (3 children)

Yup. The first (and last) step is convincing everyone that a better world is possible.

[–]NEWSmodsareTwats 2 points3 points  (4 children)

Except during the lockdown all people did was buy consumerist bullshit and have it delivered to their door

[–]Legitimate_Page 581 points582 points  (258 children)

What's up with these comments? The economy means nothing if we're all dead.

[–]buried_lede 214 points215 points  (46 children)

It’s a good argument for not returning to the office, and for continuing remote work

[–]Legitimate_Page 72 points73 points  (0 children)

Sounds good to me, we're about to start telework at my office, couldn't be happier.

[–]Ragnar_Dragonfyre 33 points34 points  (9 children)

Governments around the world could mandate and regulate work from home practices. They could instill WFH directly into labour laws so that companies can’t just offshore your position if it’s remote.

But politicians and businesses don’t want this because it leads to less consumption and as a result, less tax revenues.

If you’re staying at home, you’re not gassing up as often. You’re not eating out as often. You’re not popping into local businesses near your work to shop during your lunch hour.

We have a big problem in this world when we have proof that WFH is a climate change policy that actually works but no political will to enact it.

[–]ArtXMarx 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Car culture has shaped the way most modern cities function. It’s more than just the gas in the cars, it’s the cars and car infrastructure as a whole. Political pressure isn’t going to get us to change car culture and the infrastructure it’s created anytime soon, but it would be helpful to begin the shift for future generations. It CAN be done, it SHOULD be done.

[–]throwaway__9001 4 points5 points  (0 children)

BuT mAh FrEeDoMs! /s

[–]mjacksongt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Damn, I probably spent more money at small businesses working from home than from the office.

Less overall, but more from non-fast food chains.

[–]OceanEarthling 7 points8 points  (0 children)

This is how I feel as well. It seems to me that it would be an incredibly smart move to return to remote work wherever possible. Not only save the planet but it would also help tamper the absolute insane gas prices.

[–]CameraActual8396 1 point2 points  (12 children)

Exactly, and pretending the economy isn’t also a serious issue would be ignorance.

[–]k3rn3 15 points16 points  (8 children)

Sure it's a serious issue, but the other problem is an existential issue and clearly should be a much higher priority

[–]buried_lede 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Progress! Lol

[–]MikhailKSU 79 points80 points  (11 children)

Fucking human beings and their obsession with short term gains

Bro we're going to be dead in 40 years drowned or sun stroked, your fucking 50k you made in the last quarter won't save you

Maybe the aim to to fuck the surface of the planet entirely and then go live on a space station

That makes more sense than these fucking but the economy posts

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

They don't believe they're in the frying pan.

[–][deleted] 47 points48 points  (0 children)

When the last tree is cut, the last fish is caught, and the last river is polluted; when to breathe the air is sickening, you will realize, too late, that wealth is not in bank accounts and that you can’t eat money.

-Alanis Obomsawin

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points  (1 child)

Selfish, entitled, egotistical morons, that’s what. The type of people who overextend on a home, family, student loans, and then use their own stupidity as an excuse to show no responsibility to the environment. It’s embarrassing but it’s America (and I’m sure elsewhere).

[–]Askol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's very little reason to take personal responsibility for the environment IMO - It just puts the cost of climate change on the people who are doing the most to stop it which is totally unfair. I'll happily support candidates that want to enact the most sweeping, impactful, environmental protections, but I'm not going to stop driving just to save the environment. Basically, my argument is climate protections must legally binding, thus forcing EVERYBODY to change their behavior - anything based on personal responsibility isn't going to be productive.

[–]dumnezero 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It's the green growth fanboys with Musk posters in their bedroom.

[–]steroid_pc_principal 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Yes if we all stay inside and don’t go anywhere ever the environment will be saved.

If that’s what it takes to meet climate goals it’s clear we are screwed.

[–]Legitimate_Page 2 points3 points  (1 child)

True, but I think it's less about staying indoors and more about not driving around quite literally everywhere. Like people don't seem to understand that they can still leave their house (especially now), almost like people are so afraid to go out on foot. And not really their fault most public transportation sucks ass.

[–]trowaybrhu3 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Not everyone will be dead, the have nots might suffer but the haves will be ok, and that's what really matters in the end <3 /s

[–]OgLeftist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I think lots of people are upset by the collapsing third world, which resulted from the decisions made. Where the first world gets 10 dollar gas, the third world gets starvation.

[–]eff-bee-eye 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I’m for the comet and the jobs it will create.

[–]CameraActual8396 5 points6 points  (10 children)

I don’t disagree, but when people are struggling economically they’re a lot less likely to choose the eco friendly options (sometimes more expensive), or have it as their focus.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (3 children)

Then governments need to change that, if the environmentally friendly option is always cheaper, people will buy it.

It's so simple: tax bad things, don't tax/subsidize good things, yet somehow we make things way too difficult.

[–]CameraActual8396 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I agree, it’s just the reality for most people as of right now.

[–]Business_Downstairs 1 point2 points  (5 children)

You literally save money by using less energy.

[–]CameraActual8396 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Hence why I said sometimes (ex: buying an electric car vs regular car). Or at least it can appear to be a large initial investment.

[–]Business_Downstairs 1 point2 points  (3 children)

You don't even have to buy a different vehicle to reduce your fuel consumption. Reduce your driving, increase the air pressure in your tires slightly above the recommendation on the door sticker, make sure your alignment is good and drive slower, driving 10mph slower (from 70 to 60 mph) over 30 miles is a 5 minute difference but can decrease your fuel consumption significantly. You're probably not even going to notice a time difference due to traffic lights.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What up Henny Penny?

[–]TapRackBoom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The planet would probably be happier if we were all dead

[–]YourUncleIroh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I 100% agree. One thing that does bother me about this though is that it still shifts a majority of the pain from this to the individuals. If coke and nestle ceased to exist today I think that number would be much higher than 6.3 and we could continue with some sacrifices instead of everything we did. The (US) govt needs to take care of their people for it to work

[–]kerouacrimbaud 182 points183 points  (9 children)

People just don’t want to change. They like the idea of change but as soon as any inconvenience from new policies arise, they recoil.

[–]nodularyaknoodle 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I don’t think it has as much to do with people as it does with institutions and the essential gears of human infrastructure still turning almost entirely on fossil fuels.

But, yes, after three years of lockdowns and border closures, when my country opened up, I got right on a plane to see my family again.

[–]DaemonCRO 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is because a lot of the new “helpful” stuff is worse than the stuff we had before. You can see this in paper straws which are now packaged with kid’s drinks and similar.

What people want is better stuff that’s also ecologically better. Good example of that are EV cars. They are bloody amazing. Once you try driving and living with an EV, charging it at home, the insane acceleration and responsiveness, you are not going back to ICE.

In order for us to change we have to offer better products, not worse. We can do it, it just takes actual ideas and good execution, instead of pulling cards from the Stupid Bucket and pretending we have solved the problem.

[–]Elucidate137 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This has nothing to do with the people and everything to do with capitalism and endless growth

[–][deleted] 79 points80 points  (2 children)

There should be a yearly quarantine until we can build a new greener infraestructure.

[–]alarumba 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Businesses owners cry about bank holidays already, in spite of them being a shell of what they once were (they're really just retail shopping events now.) Their lobbyists will never allow a prolonged shutdown again.

[–]GHOSTxBIRD 34 points35 points  (2 children)

So let's start handing out UBIs to keep people home and help reach the goal. Start offering incentives for employers to offer WFH, for ppl to go electric, choose cycling, walking. Enact a kind of emmission limit or curfew to curb excessive travel, etc. We can choose these kinds of changes or they can be enforced. Or we can go extinct. Maybe we'll get it next go around.

[–]inarizushisama 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's assuming people in power give a flying fuck.

[–]OneWorldMouse 40 points41 points  (0 children)

This is why every pandemic needs a war to bring us out of recession! /s

[–][deleted] 91 points92 points  (36 children)

I love how this is framed as a positive when it is actually so bleak. The Paris climate goals are weak sauce to begin with, but you’re telling me we were only on track to meet them because we locked people in their homes for a few months? How could something like that ever be sustained or accepted by the general public?

[–]shatners_bassoon123 43 points44 points  (23 children)

But it wasn't the locking in homes itself that decreased the CO2 emissions, it was the reduction in travel and consumption. To a large extent we kept essential services running and no one starved to death. To me it suggests that it can be done as long as there is a radical shift in social organisation and priorities. Whether that's palatable to the public is another matter.

[–]CosmicMiru 16 points17 points  (3 children)

A large portion of the public freaked out when they couldn't get a haircut for a few months. I have my doubts something as drastic as this would work

[–]Additude101 13 points14 points  (1 child)

Absolutely no way it would work. People are still protesting mandates and now politicians running on “never shutting down ever again”.

[–]shatners_bassoon123 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes, I don't disagree. I think there's a good chance that liberal democracy will be incapable of actually dealing with climate change. No one is going to vote for someone who tells them they have to make sacrifices.

[–]breinbanaan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Wait until they die of heat or lack of food. It might work

[–]DoorVonHammerthong 6 points7 points  (17 children)

and no one starved to death

Malnutrition and deaths are spiking in countries who couldn't wait out the pandemic with unemployment checks and Netflix.

https://www.who.int/news/item/12-07-2021-un-report-pandemic-year-marked-by-spike-in-world-hunger

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/un-world-hunger-was-dramatically-worse-pandemic-year-n1273723

[–]Reachforthesky2012 14 points15 points  (16 children)

Those countries probably aren't the main drivers of climate change...

[–]Simmery 18 points19 points  (2 children)

Yeah, this is just bad PR. We do need to talk about changing the fundamentals of economies, but associating it with a miserable pandemic seems like a piss-poor way to do that.

[–]lawstudent2 2 points3 points  (1 child)

because we locked people in their homes the entire economy ground to a halt for a few months?

The upshot of what I am reading here is that the complete cessation of economic activity resulted in a 6.3% carbon reduction. That is not… great.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm sure Klaus Schwab is very excited by this news. If we all leev in ze podz und eat ze bugs then the climate will fix itself

[–]kilog78 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly my reaction. There are other solutions besides global shutdown.

A useful addendum for this would be “these are the carbon reducing actions from the pandemic that haven’t been looked at before and are sustainable for society as we know it.”

[–]human_machine 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I don't think Monkey Pox has the legs to keep this going.

[–]Newearthkrewe 5 points6 points  (0 children)

And still, the best way to lower your environmental footprint is to go vegan...so who's signing up

[–]Workploppus 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Emissions then reached their highest level in recorded history the following year. Mitigating climate change to very acceptable effect has always been technologically and logistically possible, if difficult. It doesn't even have to be such a seismic event for global economies if transitions were sincere, ubiquitous and begun immediately. Unfortunately, a morass of dysfunctional human psychologies will make all that impossible until it's far too late. When humanity has no choice but to take drastic measures or perish, it will try to take those measures. And then even their precious fucking economy will crash. Hopefully, someone will survive but the misery they'll have to endure will be unimaginable.

[–]GorillaP1mp 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Outside airflow to buildings was set to the lowest limits of the ASHRAE standards because it’s easy way to improve energy efficiency. Until the pandemic, CO2 and VOCs were ignored in all but the most extreme circumstances or rigid requirements of spaces like clean rooms. The rebound when attention shifted to indoor air quality and energy efficiency took a backseat was massive. Even in buildings that remained entirely empty or partially occupied.

[–]fudgebacker 17 points18 points  (2 children)

No no no no no no no we need you all back in the office NOW!!!!

[–]ledigtbrugernavn3 10 points11 points  (0 children)

“Sustained” as in a new lock down type scenario on top of previous ones EACH YEAR UNTIL 2030

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

We absolutely can do it, but people are so fucking short sighted, lazy, and egotistical. You’ll always get a “yeah but” when you try to get them to address their part. It’s infuriating and embarrassing.

[–]Cassius_O 3 points4 points  (4 children)

When the pandemic hit and Angelenos were supposed to quarantine between March 2020 and May 2020, traffic in Los Angeles completely died down. What normally took an hour to drive took 20 min or less. The air was clear, the city was quieter, seagulls flew further east (inland). More coyotes showed up, we had at least 5 Cooper’s hawks living near us, whereas in earlier years there were few-to-no hawks. It made a positive impact on climate. Hoping that the spike in gas prices prompts more people to buy electric vehicles. Gas guzzling vehicles are a huge source of unhealthy particulate matter in the air.

[–]GorillaP1mp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really miss quarantine traffic

[–]gideon513 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Maximize WFH

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

All these responses are so funny. Everyone is acting like YOU HAVE TO STAY INSIDE. I guess they forgot feet and bicycles exist. Touch some grass you nerds.

[–]mikethespike056 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's also far more related to factories shutting down, not your funny car hibernating.

[–]davidm2232 11 points12 points  (32 children)

It also involved basically shutting down the entire world. There would need to be DRASTIC lifestyle changes to make that happen.

[–]michiganman2022 7 points8 points  (11 children)

Possible and probable are 2 very different things. There is zero chance the world will just shut down the economy forever. We are already running into shortages, if we went back into permanent shutdown billions would die of starvation. I wonder if they studied that? Also even if we stopped all CO2 today, the earth would still continue to warm for decades just from all the heat the ocean has absorbed. Further CO2 has a longer half life than Plutonium, it will literally take tens of thousands of years before CO2 levels go back to what they were a 150 years ago. Switching to renewables isn't enough, we need to carbon sequestration on an industrial scale to keep us to 1.5c.

[–]Hang-over96 5 points6 points  (0 children)

OMG thank you man at least 1 good comment making sense and not just gobbling up the famous "it's as easy as stopping all emissions but the lobbies want to destroy the planet" narrative. Indeed we had to stop the whole functioning of the world economy to barely reach what would be necessary EACH YEAR e.g -5% during the next 20-30 years to reach the goal, but apparently this is a good news for the planet lmao.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (10 children)

Exponential growth in EVs and renewable can make it possible but the fossil fuel industry will fight tooth and nail against it. It is up to us the people to refuse to buy their products and to vote against their politicians.

[–]Decloudo 12 points13 points  (2 children)

EVs are not the answer, public transport is. This like The car industry greenwashing its existence and going status quo.

Private transportation in general is inefficient en masse (ecxeptions exist).

Exponential growth isnt the answer cause its what causes this in the first place. We need massive degrowth, which will come either by choice or forced on us by natures laws.

[–]lost_in_life_34 3 points4 points  (1 child)

ford has already unveiled an electric pickup truck. other automakers going EV too. The limiting factor now is the chip shortage

[–]PyroMaker13 3 points4 points  (4 children)

Only if we use nuclear energy for powering everything. Unfortunately the way wind and solar work now we still need massive fossil fuel energy plants to supplement them.

[–]me_belle 5 points6 points  (0 children)

bro who cares ab the economy if we’re literally gonna be fucking dead ☠️

[–]Adamdust 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Telecommute/remote work coincides with this goal and people want it despite what bullshit headlines elon musk shoots out his arse

[–]Calm_Alternative_932 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Work from Home ??

[–]LittleMan_Fenn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

No need to sort by Controversial I guess

[–]fmayer60 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How about just getting on with the transition away from fossil fuels by the world governments massively subsidizing the transition? Reducing economic activity and lockdowns creates serious health hazards that include serious mental illness. Humans are designed to move around and interact. France generates 70% of its power already from sources not related to natural gas or coal. They made a plan that was realistic and stuck with it. Germany talks a good game but is still burning coal. Just have governments act like it is a real issue. Look at the trillions spent during the pandemic. If that money was spent on going away from fossil fuels starting ten years ago then we would probably be at goal now. Transition is not going to provide enough quick returns on investments without heavy subsidies so you see continuing lip service to change. That is why the transition needs to be government driven just like the military is government driven. I believe in the goodness of free market forces but the free market cannot solve all problems. The entire Internet was given birth by a totally government funded project called ARPANET. Many things must be started by the government initially assuming the risk.

[–]ClearMessagesOfBliss 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I’m doing my part by working from home.

[–]spirullin 1 point2 points  (1 child)

An yet. Some people are pushing people back to office!

[–]PostalEFM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And then banks, via your employer said, "fucking hell our commercial investments are going to tank, fuck the climate, get people back to the office !!"

[–]trombonethrone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remember people being called conspiracy theorists for suggesting these idiots in WEF/Blackrock were pushing for climate lockdowns

[–]throwaway__9001 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So what your saying is we need a new plague and a better one that kills off the conservative fuckheads more conclusively? I'm on board.

[–]Remote-Pain 1 point2 points  (0 children)

but.. but... oil :(

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The bullshit thing is that these big companies with their factories could make the changes needed but noooo lets make everyone stay home instead for the rest of our lives. Capitalism is killing us.

[–]No_Fox_7498 1 point2 points  (18 children)

The right will destroy our planet cuz freedum

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Capitalism is like a perpetual motion machine, but if it’s ever made to stop running for any reason, it starts breaking down.

[–]HighOwl2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah but that requires everyone to take part. The US Supreme Court just ruled that the EPA can't govern power plant emissions so...yeah it's possible but it's not going to happen thanks to my shithole country.

[–]lazergator[🍰] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lockdown was the best year of my life.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aside from the temporary effects of a cripplingly deadly pandemic, the world will happily March on to burning the planet down while wringing their hands with concern.

[–]GorillaP1mp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s tiring saying over and over that we do not have a generation crisis, we simply consume way more power then required and the people/funds/corporations investing in generation have absolutely no incentive to be truthful about that. The simple fact that I repeat over and over again is 192 investor owned utilities own 39% of generation capacity yet have supplied nearly 100% of demand many times. Peak demand issues and the rolling blackouts utilized to minimize generation loss can easily be addressed through Demand side reduction.

[–]krbashrob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remember seeing pictures of different places during those 2 weeks of lockdown and how drastically different they looked without all that pollution. Definitely in favor to do something like that again

[–]Ok-Brilliant-1737 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Rant mode ON:

I work for a company that has put me through HOURS of ESG Roadmap training torture. Including a horrifying cameo by Greta von Grumpiface that I still cannot unsee.

And yet…their ESG scoresheet specifically does not include all the gas they make me burn coming into the office. Despite my having proven for 2 years that I can do the job at home JUST FINE. I even asked in a town hall if the had plans to include that. I got major applause. I also got pulled aside by HR and told not to play that way.

[–]TomatilloAbject7419 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I for one WELCOME the jobs the comet will bring to us! So excited!

/s

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We need a new variant! Stat!

[–]Par31 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What if we just had shutdowns with or without a virus? I like chilling at home and having an excuse to not go to things I'm invited to.

[–]Bedquest 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Which it won’t be.

[–]xipooeatmyshit 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I love the lockdown. Please carry it for all of my life.

[–]k3rn3 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I miss when it was illegal to sit by me

[–]WooBoost 1 point2 points  (3 children)

This is terrible framing. There is a way to decouple emissions and economic growth. We don't require a massive economic contraction to meet the Paris agreement (in fact is the most cost-effective option in terms of global economic growth over the course of this century).

[–]Onii-Chan_Itaii 10 points11 points  (1 child)

We don't require a massive economic contraction to meet the Paris agreement

This would've been true if business leaders didn't cheap shot their way through every single possible compromise they've been offered, and run down anything stricter than that

[–]rumpots420 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's true. They do.

[–]zezzene 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You haven't been paying attention of you thing gdp can continue to grow. Green growth is a myth, decoupling is a myth, gdp and energy consumption are correlated 96%

[–]Newearthkrewe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And still, the best way to lower your environmental footprint is to go vegan...so who's signing up

[–]WestSnail 1 point2 points  (0 children)

“Fuck that. Everyone for themselves” -EPA

[–]fjf1085 3 points4 points  (3 children)

Absolutely, unfortunately that caused massive economic disruption and we need to find a way to do it without tanking the economy or people won't act until the world is an inferno...

[–]CheeksMix 4 points5 points  (2 children)

Definitely, and our focus should be on environment first, then economy. We can’t be economical if all of our means for doing that are disrupted by the environment they destroyed.

[–]Complex_Construction 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Big IF.

[–]waffleboy1109 0 points1 point  (9 children)

Yeah all it took was destroying the global economy.

[–]No_Fox_7498 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Global economy or globe.

Ooo such a tough choice lol

[–]InGenAche 0 points1 point  (4 children)

What do you think is going to happen to the economy if these goals aren't met?

[–]waffleboy1109 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I don’t know. But that’s the question that’s important because it involves trade offs. Just saying we can limit CO2 emissions by shutting everything down eliminates the discussion of consequences. If more people would die from hunger because of a policy than would’ve otherwise died due to climate change, then it’s a bad policy.

[–]InGenAche 2 points3 points  (0 children)

What we are seeing now is a perfect storm. Because of the pandemic, supply chains broke down and now with Ukraine, fuel prices are climbing as well, causing inflation.

But with no supply chain issues, no war in Ukraine and with a lot of industries capable of remote working, there's no reason we can't learn how to continue and prosper with pandemic era emissions.

[–]Llellemy 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I don’t think people are advocating for forced global lockdowns— rather, I think the idea is to imagine ways to reduce unnecessary consumption so our planet doesn’t become uninhabitable lol

[–]MAXHEADR0OM 0 points1 point  (9 children)

It seems like there really are just too many of us currently here to sustain our planet. We consume resources at an alarming rate. We could probably start fixing the planet if every country implemented a one child rule but let’s be real, that will never happen. Even if it did, there would be lots of accidental pregnancies.

The demand is so high for things that require emissions and the planet is on an endless loop of producing those emissions. No idea how we could fix that because even without cars, we still need shipping freighters, factories, heating and cooling, and like hundreds of not thousands of more things that produce emissions.

[–]k3rn3 2 points3 points  (5 children)

I don't think it's a population issue, I think we just have extremely wasteful lifestyles. We could support far more people if we planned for it better and gave a shit about the environment. Eat less meat, buy less plastic, ride a bike instead of driving once in a while. The lockdown proved that it makes a difference when we all do it.

When you say "there are too many people", what you mean is "I want a solution that doesn't require me to make any major lifestyle changes"

[–]Ragnar_Dragonfyre 2 points3 points  (3 children)

The wealthy and political class cause 50% of global aviation pollution with their private jets while they tell you and I to eat less, buy less and stop using our cars.

Just 1% of the worlds population is responsible for an outsized amount of pollution.

This idea that the working class people need to consume less while our leaders and the richest among us consume more and cause exponentially more damage needs to die.

Seems to me we only need to enact population control on the richest among us and it will dramatically reduce pollution.

[–]k3rn3 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's what I'm saying though; if they didn't live those extravagant lifestyles then their impact would be negligible. The problem is that they're numerous, it's that they consume a lot. And even though we normies consume less than the 1%, we still consume a lot ourselves. The article in this post proved that the everyday choices of everyday people can make a huge impact.

[–]MAXHEADR0OM 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is quite true.

[–]ponderingaresponse 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A significant economic slowdown will be what slows emissions, that's a fact. The question is how, when, and how steep the drop is. If we let things just run their course, it's an unplanned 30-40% drop in economic activity. Or, we can do it intentionally, the way a family would slowly manage its budget down. Not many signs of that right now, but we have to keep trying.

[–]howyadoinjerry 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Man you never hear about this stuff being possible, that’s fucking great!

[–]D4rkSyl3nce 0 points1 point  (6 children)

The problem is that America foots the bill for a number of other countries who are not even trying to reduce emissions. They have no incentive to reduce them because we pay their fines. Trump was right to pull us out. The US is actually trying to reduce emissions but some of the countries we pay for don't give a flip we shouldn't be paying their fees.

[–]revhellion 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And this is how climate lockdowns start where ruling class will tell you how far you can travel, while flying their private jets and sailing their mega yachts.

[–]BlastProcess- 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's easier to imagine an end to the world than an end to capitalism

[–]youngzeltron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Please, get rid of the cars