discuss The Environmental Thread - Earth Matters, so what's holding us back?

[Cannuck]

I believe everyone would agree on at least one point - planet Earth matters! For years, scholars and environmentalists have touted the idea - that the boundaries of life on our planet have been stretched to a breaking point by human activity. From a scientific perspective, the notion of climate change is no longer up for debate. Our species and life as it exists on planet Earth now depends on the choices we humans make. Each individual with a brain possesses the ability to contribute solutions to our common current dilemma, so what's holding us back?

Is it our lack of knowledge; a conflict of interest; the lack of will, and/or other priorities that define the human race? Do we possess the courage to take an initiative, to act upon our convictions and choose to help preserve the Blue planet? Have our environmental problems become too big for individuals to tackle that we must leave it for governments to handle?

Are we limited by our own self-interests, by the confines of our own box or bubble? Have we merely been caught up in our daily mundane existence, distracted by the media and current affairs, that we fail to consider the future? Is Climate Change simply a hoax? Is the human species destined to evolve or are we doomed to extinction?

Here is place to discuss any pertinent thoughts or ideas you may have on the subject. Every thought counts. Please be respectful.

 

[Cannuck]

70% decline in species populations since 1970, mainly due to habitat degradation and exploitation, human population growth chipping away at the fabric of life on our planet. (edited)

 

[Cal2]

70% of earth's species have been lost since 1970, mainly due to habitat degradation and exploitation, human population growth chipping away at the fabric of life on our planet.

70% of species lost? or 70% decline in species populations? I think it's decline.

https://www.google.com/search?q=spe...l3j0i390l3.9250j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Cannuck]

70% of species lost? or 70% decline in species populations? I think it's decline.

Good catch, Cal

*The headline of this article was amended on 13 October 2022. The figure of 70% relates to the average decline across a range of animal populations since 1970, not to the percentage of animal populations “wiped out” since then as an earlier version said.​

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-70-of-animal-populations-wiped-out-since-1970-report-reveals-aoe​

To put that into perspective, the total loss is similar to the human population of Europe, the Americas, Africa, Oceania and China disappearing.

 

[Cannuck]

How can we beat higher prices at the pump? ​

Get rid of the pump! ​

Electric or bust: A snapshot of recent EV and battery announcements in Canada​

​

European Fuel Prices​

The request for EU member states to fill up their gas reserves could have potentially aided the run-up seen in gas prices. Now that most of the countries managed to stock up roughly 80% of their natural gas capacity, the price action is reversing.

“Even if the conflict in Ukraine ended today, the energy crisis would not end. The real causes of energy insecurity are under-investment in oil and gas, no ready alternatives, and no backup plan.”

Norway, the largest of European oil and gas producers (-Russia), domestic fuel prices are also the highest in Europe.​

​

 

[Cannuck]

Ignorance is bliss... but the suffering is real.

 

[Cannuck]

Earth Matters, so what's holding us back?​

Nothing ...stay calm and keep on frackin'!

 

[Cannuck]

https://phys.org/news/2022-10-climate-26c-global.html

 

[Cannuck]

Time series of climate-related human activities. Data obtained since the publication of Ripple and colleagues (2021) are shown in red (dark gray in print). In panel (f), tree cover loss does not account for forest gain and includes loss due to any cause. For panel (h), hydroelectricity and nuclear energy are shown in supplemental figure S1. In panel (j), assets divested reflects total assets under management based on institutional commitments.

Credit: BioScience (2022). DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biac083

 

[Cannuck]

Graphs of predicted temperatures and residual damages by region and time period

Damages calculated for 12 regions and for every decade from 2020 to 2100

KOSAU-Korea, South Africa ; CAJANZ-Canada, Japan, New Zealand; TE-Transition Economies; MENA-Middle East and North Africa ; SSA-Sub-Saharan Africa ; SASIA-South Asia; EASIA-East Asia; LACA-Latin and Central America and the Caribbean

Note: for each scenario all estimates are given in billions of USD (in 2005 prices).

Source: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-72026-5_14

 

[Cannuck]

Geo-politics...

Places where people are born, grow, work, live and die includes the broader set of forces which often determine the conditions of everyday life.

These forces impact regional economic development policies, environmental protection and social programs that are instituted and regulated by geopolitics and dispelled among its citizenry (ie. media influence).

"Ending the environment is the fastest way to end society." - Martin Luther King

 

[Cannuck]

Greenwashing ...what it is and what's being done about it?

Secretary-General António Guterres (COP27) said, “A growing number of governments and non-state actors are pledging to be carbon-free - and obviously that’s good news. The problem is that the criteria and benchmarks for these net-zero commitments have varying levels of rigor and loopholes wide enough to drive a diesel truck through. We must have zero tolerance for net-zero greenwashing.”

He also said that, “the Expert Group report is a how-to guide to ensure credible, accountable net zero pledges.”

Former Canadian Minister of Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna outlined the report with a series of must haves and things to avoid. To have a credible net zero position companies:

• Must have short medium and long-term targets starting in 2025.
• Must show their work – have a transition plan that is being implemented across the value chain.
• Must report publicly on plans and performance with verifiable data and information

She also said that the report is clear on what constitutes credibility and what will be considered greenwashing. "No one can consider themselves net zero if they build or invest in new oil and gas, or are involved in deforestation. It is also clear that companies cannot use cheap carbon credits to reach net zero instead of working on its own emissions – the first priority must be internal cuts. There is a role for the use of high-quality carbon credits but these must be seen as ‘in addition’ to emissions cuts."

"It means ensuring that every corporate action comes from a consistent base – that means that no company can call itself a climate leader and lobby against climate action. Consistency in talk and action is a fundamental requirement of avoiding greenwash."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/integrity-matters-un-net-zero-group-sets-greenwash-and-offsets-boundaries/?

INTEGRITY MATTERS - NET ZERO COMMITMENTS BY BUSINESSES, FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, CITIES AND REGIONS REPORT FROM THE UNITED NATIONS’ HIGH-LEVEL EXPERT GROUP ON THE NET ZERO EMISSIONS COMMITMENTS OF NON-STATE ENTITIES

https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/high-level_expert_group_n7b.pdf

The Global Climate Action Portal

https://climateaction.unfccc.int/

 

[Cannuck]

Greenwashing ...what it is and what's being done about it?

Beware of false advertising. There's often more to a product than meets the eye.

As a long-time ecopreneur, I see it all the time. Be aware of the false labelling of some products that claim to be eco-friendly, but upon closer inspection, it is merely a marketing scheme for greenwashing consumers.

Greenwashing occurs when a product or company uses environmental terms in a loose and unsubstantiated manner. While the state of the environment is a real problem that concerns us all, there are companies trying to jump on the environmentally preferred bandwagon.

Oftentimes, in order to increase revenues, a company will simply rebrand their product without making any fundamental changes.

The formulas, processing, packaging and shipping - all pieces to the environmentally friendly puzzle - stay the same; the only thing that changes are the claims on the label.

Greenwashing: The False Advertising Of The Green Movement​

 

[Cannuck]

Beware of false advertising. There's often more to a product than meets the eye.

As Name Pros, we ought to be well aware of 'greenwashing" in the free-market. The word "green" doesn't always mean "clean" and we, as domainers, know that key words play a critical role in search engine optimization and meta algorithms, just as supermarket shelves are often stocked with products that have already seen mass market adoption since their bottom line is profit, not necessarily helping the planet.

The conflict of trust arises when consumers, who have been "brainwashed" through commercial advertising by multi-billion dollar companies, purchase products which are not actually what they claim to be. Corporate giants' pockets are deep, and in an extremely competitive marketplace, it is very difficult for the "little guy" to enter and break into, even when providing superior products and services. The market is literally saturated.

Word of mouth is my 'ace in the hole' and a repeat customer base has been my staple. It's extremely difficult to educate people to adopt to something they have not heard of nor tried before. I call it, "nature's best kept secret", lol. Although some are willing to try my product (and I am not self-promoting), many simply follow their habitual television programming without thinking. For example, I could be sued for using the catchline, "If it's got to be clean, it's got to be 'green'" ...you get the idea.

Another difficulty is, new rulings do not allow patents for a natural product - or one which grows naturally. This has typically been probematic in the eco-friendly industry, and manufacturers will get around that roadblock by using additives or by combining synthetic ingredients that form different compounds. One must be aware of and this when purchasing products as the claims made by their manufacturer may not always true (or green).

Cavet emptor (buyer beware).

 

[Cal2]

No one knows what “nature-based solutions” are​

The environmental movement has a buzzword problem.

Clear definitions matter, especially as countries and companies are pushed to curb or reverse their impacts on ecosystems and the climate. It’s hard to hold them to account if you don’t know what they’re doing, experts say.

“If we’re trying to say the world should be doing things differently than the status quo to meet climate goals, or nature goals, or socioeconomic development goals, we need to be really clear about what it is that we’re proposing or promoting,” said Richard Waite, a food researcher at the World Resources Institute (WRI), a DC-based think tank.

So, let’s get clear: What do these buzzwords mean, how are they exploited, and what should we be using instead? .....

https://www.vox.com/down-to-earth/2022/11/17/23460525/nature-based-solutions-climate-change-cop27

 

[Cannuck]

No one knows what “nature-based solutions” are​

The environmental movement has a buzzword problem.

Voice Conservation​

Those that have been practising conservation long before Climate Change was a thing, find their voices muted (lands and rights dimished) amongst the 'greenrush'. Here are some videos from indigenous people world-wide regarding such issues:

https://www.survivalinternational.org/articles/tribalvoiceconservation

 

[Cal2]

Voice Conservation​

Those that have been practising conservation long before Climate Change was a thing, find their voices muted (lands and rights dimished) amongst the 'greenrush'. Here are some videos from indigenous people world-wide regarding such issues:

https://www.survivalinternational.org/articles/tribalvoiceconservation

Maybe they could use magnifying their voices, get others to pay more attention to and add to their voices?

Slogans vs. Taglines: What’s your brand’s battlecry?​

https://www.ries.com/2015/11/13/slogans-vs-taglines-whats-your-brands-battlecry/

 

[dna]

The Centralia coal mine fire has been burning in Pennsylvania since 1962.
At its current rate, it could continue to burn for another 250 years.
If politicians really cared about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
this fire would have been put out years ago.
But Democrats can't figure out how to make any money from putting
out this coal fire. Whereas the $570 million that went to Solyndra
and the $401 million that went to Abound Solar made millions
for Obama contributors before the companies went bankrupt.
And the Carbon Tax will bring in lots of money.

 

[Cannuck]

The Centralia coal mine fire has been burning in Pennsylvania since 1962.
At its current rate, it could continue to burn for another 250 years.
If politicians really cared about carbon dioxide in the atmosphere,
this fire would have been put out years ago.
But Democrats can't figure out how to make any money from putting
out this coal fire.

Where have the Republicans been since 1962? The environment is a bi-partisan issue.

Whereas the $570 million that went to Solyndra
and the $401 million that went to Abound Solar made millions
for Obama contributors before the companies went bankrupt.
And the Carbon Tax will bring in lots of money.

Whereas $570M of what? It sounds cooked to me.

 

[dna]

I don't know why you don't already know this, or can't find it for yourself, but,
you can read about Solyndra here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solyndra

Republicans don't believe that carbon dioxide is a real or serious
environmental problem. So, it really isn't a bi-partisan issue.
But Democrats rant and rave about carbon dioxide and yet
do nothing about this coal fire. And why is that?
It's because no money can be made from stopping this fire.

 

[Cannuck]

Republicans don't believe that carbon dioxide is a real or serious
environmental problem. So, it really isn't a bi-partisan issue.
But Democrats rant and rave about carbon dioxide and yet
do nothing about this coal fire. And why is that?
It's because no money can be made from stopping this fire.

Air quality is important as it impacts everyone, so where there's a will, there's a way.

A fact largely ignored by people living in the south is the impact of burning fossil fuel has on Arctic permafrost domain, melting permafrost releases hundreds of giga-tons of CO2 and methane.

Negative emmisions technologies are necessary in order to preserve Arctic ecosystems, as this effects everyone, not just those living in northern regions.

Though permafrost-affected regions cover only 10% of Earth’s surface, they constitute more than half of all remaining terrestrial and marine wilderness (Watson et al., 2018), making them crucial to maintaining biosphere integrity in our rapidly changing world.

These regions, which we refer to as the permafrost domain (Figure 1), contain between 2.5 and 3 trillion tons of organic carbon—more than all of Earth’s other life, soil, and atmosphere combined (Hugelius et al., 2014; Abbott et al., 2016b; Sayedi et al., 2020; Mishra et al., 2021; Abbott B. W., 2022; Schuur et al., 2022).

The permafrost domain is home to tens of millions of people, including diverse Indigenous and immigrant cultures that both depend on and sustain these globally-significant ecosystems (Riedlinger and Berkes, 2001; Parkinson and Berner, 2009; Pearce et al., 2009; Chapin et al., 2013; Díaz et al., 2019; Proverbs et al., 2020; Ellis et al., 2021; Mettiäinen et al., 2022).

The permafrost domain’s three-fold importance—biodiversity, climate, and human peoples—means that governments, corporations, and communities within and outside of these regions must commit to preventing dangerous environmental change (Chapin and Díaz, 2020; Whyte, 2020; Chapin, 2021; Natali et al., 2021; Arctic Council, 2022).

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.889428/full

 

[Cal2]

The Food Chain Should Be a Food Circle​

Regenerative farming and upcycled ingredients are both on the menu for a resilient food system that’s better for humans and nature alike.

Today we know that building food systems that are resilient to shocks such as the pandemic is no longer enough. In 2023, we will be redesigning food to also help us solve pressing global challenges including climate change and biodiversity loss.

For that to be possible, the whole system needs to be regenerative by design. This means that rather than bending nature to produce food, food needs to be designed for nature to thrive. In 2023, FMCGs, retailers, and innovators will take up this mantle, working with farmers to begin creating a circular economy for food.

They will start to choose ingredients that aren’t only regeneratively produced but are also lower-impact, diverse, and upcycled. For instance, rather than making breakfast cereals using only wheat grown with conventional methods, the same product can be made from a mixture of wheat and peas grown using regenerative farming methods. According to a recent study, making cheese, cereal, and potato products using this approach could reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the food industry by 70 percent and reduce its impact on biodiversity loss by 50 percent in Europe. This is hugely significant given that the current food system is the primary driver of biodiversity loss globally and is responsible for a third of all human-made greenhouse gas emissions.

https://www.wired.com/story/agriculture-food-chain-sustainability/

 

[Cal2]

Storytelling Will Save the Earth​

Emotional resonance, not cold statistics, will bring home the scale of the climate crisis—and the need for action.

https://www.wired.com/story/environ...-89ce-e74456fe92de_text2vec1-reranked-by-vidi

 

[Cannuck]

The Food Chain Should Be a Food Circle​

This would also apply to homes built from recycled materials... called Earthships

https://www.thecoolist.com/earthship-homes/

https://greencoast.org/earthship-homes/

However, Earthships can be problematic in cold and humid climates. Several Earthships in Canada faced problems with inadequate heating. Also, in some very humid areas, there were problems with mold. Canadians solved their problems using wood stoves, propane heaters, and generators as a backup. New models of Earthships feature improved insulation and better ventilation systems to prevent mold growth.

 

[Cannuck]

The cause of many wars, a weapon, and that we cannot live without...

 

[dna]