Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

One mistake people make is pretending that every choice we make is a hard one with no good answers. Sometimes there are good decisions and bad ones, and we end up making bad ones even when the good ones are obvious. We often see this happen with individuals, it shouldn't be too surprising that this happens with societies as well.

A few years back when I looked at solutions to "cooking this planet" that didn't involve anything that would cause much disruption to most people's lives. The reason we're not solving the problem isn't because of the hard choices we have to make. It's because a few industries that might make less money if we fight climate change try to stop efforts to combat it, politicians who get money from these industries say climate change is a hoax, the public at large is largely too apathetic to remove politicians who don't act, people who oppose all collective action oppose collective action to fight climate change, the media doesn't report on it because it doesn't get ratings, etc.

Could we have everyone's standards are close to the current standards enjoyed by developed countries without destroying the planet? Maybe, maybe not. It's insanely premature to pretend that we know it's impossible. Not only have we not seriously tried to solve the problem, but a large part of the U.S. is actively opposed to even stopping the problem. "There's no solution" is an easy way to absolve us from our failures.




Just out of interest, what solutions did you discover that fit those criteria - no large disruption to most peoples lives, but suppressed by industries that stand to lose money? I think the problem is usually more that solutions require both large and disruptive changes to lifestyle and large investment and costs from industry and government...


Could you elaborate? Not cooking the planet requires moving to zero emissions AND taking them negative by a large margin beyond what simply planting forests would do. How csn we do this easily?



> voluntarily switch to a low-carbon, low-oil, low-net water use, low-net-material use economy

What about this is not hugely disruptive to lifestyles and standards of living? Its hardly an 'easy' solution to tell people to give up many modern conveniences or radically change behavior...




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: