Stop climate change

Climate change is mostly caused by burning fossil fuels for energy - and to a lesser extent, by today's agriculture.

• But note: Agriculture has other major environmental impacts too, besides just climate change.

GHGs (greenhouse gases, such as CO₂) are the gases that cause climate change. This is a pie chart of where they come from.


Note that a large chunk of emissions are a function of how much new "stuff" people buy: See sections: "manufacturing", "transporting goods", "agriculture".

Note that half of emissions come from the richest 10% of the world. This includes most people who live in "first world" countries.

Solutions we ultimately need ✊🏻✊🏽✊🏿

• Replace ALL fossil fuel energy, with renewables and/or nuclear power
  • Not technologically feasible, currently.
    • Would become more feasible if the demand for energy (and vehicles) was lower. This is quite viable, as long as people in first-world discussion "first-world", for lack of a better terminology
      
      Talk: I didn't want to say "developed countries" here, because a less experienced person reading quickly might mistake it for "developing countries" (which is the opposite of what I'm trying to convey). I also didn't want to say "rich countries" because some people might mistakenly think their country isn't rich enough for it to apply to them. So I'm stuck using an old, somewhat improper term: "first-world countries". countries are willing to make some lifestyle changes:
      • We can still have nice things, just not replace them so often
      • Reduce the need for driving
• Some lifestyle changes are still needed even if we phase out fossil fuels:
  • Stop food waste
  • Make the food supply more plant-based (does not require 100% veganism)
  • ↑ These are needed to prevent deforestation. See why.

Ongoing discussions

• How much less energy could be used in heating & cooling buildings, in most cases?

Base knowledge

Note: Some of these pages might not be written yet:

• What is climate change
• Why climate change is a problem
• Why climate change is anthropogenic

FAQ - Carbon footprint and wealth inequality

"Why care about my carbon footprint when rich people fly private jets?"

Private jets are <2% of all commercial airplane emissions i What are the private flights of the 1% doing to the planet? The numbers are in - CBC  -- "In the end, Gössling's study found that, in 2023, the total direct emissions from private jets of 15.6 Mt CO2 was equivalent to roughly 1.8 per cent of the total emissions produced by commercial aviation." , or 0.04% of the world's total emissions. i Aviation is 1.9% of the world's carbon emissions (see the pie chart at the beginning of this page). Private jets are 1.8% of that.

Don't get me wrong, the average rich person has a horrendously high carbon footprint i What are the private flights of the 1% doing to the planet? The numbers are in - CBC  ~ "Some who use private jets could be producing roughly 500 times more CO2 in a year than the average person."    The only reason the world total private jet emissions are low is because there aren't that many people flying private jets. Note: This does NOT excuse the wasteful lifestyles of rich people whatsoever. It's just a reminder that we can't let it be a reason to ignore the carbon footprints of average people. , and we should definitely deal with that. But we also have to deal with our own.

"Why care about my carbon footprint when the US military has such a massive carbon footprint?"

File:us military carbon footprint - Google Search.png

There are plenty of misleading headlines that compare the US military to much smaller things, making it look so big that you may as well neglect everything else. But when you put the numbers in perspective, you see that this is not true.

The US military is about 1% of the USA's total emissions. We still have to deal with the rest.

  US military emissions: 70 million tonnes per year. i Pentagon Fuel Use, Climate Change, and the Costs of War - Neta C. Crawford1 - Boston University - Updated and Revised, 13 November 2019 iThis is the same study cited by other Google Search results such as Forbes, Earth.org, and InsideClimateNews.org  -- "Department Of Energy data were used to estimate the total greenhouse gas emissions for standard and non-standard operations of the Department Of Defense from 2001 to 2018 (fiscal years, inclusive) to be a total of 1,267 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent."   -- Divide this by the 18 years involved, and you get 70 million tonnes per year.  -- [Also shown in the paper]: The military emits more carbon than the rest of the government combined. But that's still small compared to the rest of the country!

  Total US emissions: 7064 million tonnes per year. i Climate Change Indicators: U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (.gov)  ~ Using the same years as above (2001 to 2018), total emissions were 127,153 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent.   ~ Divide this by the 18 years involved, and you get 7064 million tonnes per year.

None of this justifies any of the horrible things that the US military does or has done. Just to say that its carbon emissions aren't an excuse to ignore all the other carbon emissions.

"Why care about my carbon footprint when fossil fuel corporations are responsible for 70% of all emissions?"

Their sales are a function of what people buy. It's 2 sides of the same coin.

"But how much do ordinary people's actions really affect the planet?"

In richer countries like US, Canada, Russia, etc., the answer is: a lot. If the whole world lived like the average person there, we would need over 3 Earths. 💬 discussion TODO: retrieve the publication that this was mentioned in If you're a leftist, think of this as a sort of unconscious privilege. 💬 discussion I hope no one takes this the wrong way. I'm not trying to pit people in poor countries against people in rich countries. I'm trying to reach more people in rich countries and tell them why & how they need to change. We need to change the cultural norms that lead to unsustainable living.

"But I heard that carbon footprint calculations are just a capitalist tool to put the blame on consumers instead of corporations?"

No.

• The less we consume fossil fuels, the less money fossil fuel companies can make.
• If a company is giving you "tips to reduce your carbon footprint", chances are the tips are so insignificant that it would have no real effect on their profit margin. They typically focus on bags, packaging and straws, which are nothing compared to the actual products sold. Even "green" products may involve just as many resources, if not more.
• Actions that actually reduce one's carbon footprint involve buying less stuff and driving less.
• Just because corporations are dishonest, doesn't mean we should throw away the whole idea of accounting for carbon. Even without capitalism or money, the math still matters.

See also

• Decarbonize the energy supply
• Cultural norms that lead to unsustainable living - and how to fix them