An Open Letter to Greta Thunberg

CtC

Mar 2019
11,824
4,205
California
That's quite interesting. Years ago, I stayed a few days with a friend of the family who lived in San Francisco. She is a lady of my gran's generation, so not that young, but the moment she came indoors she removed any warm clothing. It was winter time, but not that cold, however, she refused to wear a jumper or anything warm in the house - she just turned the heating up to the point where I felt sick. I kept the windows in my bedroom wide open day and night, so I could sleep without being too warm.

When I asked her why she did that, she said she was an American, and not like those people in Europe and the UK, who had to wear warm clothing indoors. I still don't get the point, but I felt it would be ill-mannered to question her further - it was her house and her country, and I was only a guest.
Easy. In the privacy of ones home ,it is uncomfortable to be all bundled up.
 
Sep 2013
47,146
38,562
On a hill
That's quite interesting. Years ago, I stayed a few days with a friend of the family who lived in San Francisco. She is a lady of my gran's generation, so not that young, but the moment she came indoors she removed any warm clothing. It was winter time, but not that cold, however, she refused to wear a jumper or anything warm in the house - she just turned the heating up to the point where I felt sick. I kept the windows in my bedroom wide open day and night, so I could sleep without being too warm.

When I asked her why she did that, she said she was an American, and not like those people in Europe and the UK, who had to wear warm clothing indoors. I still don't get the point, but I felt it would be ill-mannered to question her further - it was her house and her country, and I was only a guest.
As my parents aged, they kept the house so warm that it was uncomfortable for me.
 
Jul 2011
4,171
6,312
UK/Australia
Easy. In the privacy of ones home ,it is uncomfortable to be all bundled up.
Well, I think much depends upon what one means by 'all bundled up'.

This is all bundled up -

1573131378751.png

This is being comfortable in a cool environment -

1573132067797.png
 
Dec 2018
5,739
2,334
Florida
Doing nothing also passes costs on to others.

China seems to be doing quite a lot.
Yes. Doing nothing can pass costs on. But not for the one cutting corners. And it can save money in the short term. And when you are dealing with a nation with as many people and that doesn’t even have the same basic human rights? I’d say it is very likely that they experience government corruption regularly. Which leads me to the next...

Forgive me if I fail to take things that Chinese government officials say at face value.
 
Dec 2018
5,739
2,334
Florida
China is doing quite a bit and they're developing technology to do even more. In the end it may be that they save all our asses. Besides, we have a far bigger carbon footprint per capita.

And for some reason, Wyoming puts out a lot more carbon per capita than any other state, while NY is the lowest:





Imagine what the US could do if we just turned our heaters down a couple of degrees and our AC up the same. I don't know why, but I know several people who seem to take joy in wasting energy. They get least bit cold and turn the heater up instead of putting on a sweater. I really don't get that.
A couple of things. Per capita doesn’t really matter in the end game. What matters is total output. So I DO agree that it would be better if China “saved us.” Because of their output. And if we could rip off their technology? Even better (since they do it anyway). And that would benefit the world. I don’t disagree. But like I said in another post...I don’t trust Chinese government or business officials to do ANYTHING unless the cost makes sense. Nor do I trust them to do anything other than make grandiose statements. They aren’t really known as an honest government after all.

As for people? I don’t get it either. I live in Florida. So I get having AC on when it is super hot and stuff. I don’t want to be miserable just like anyone else. But when the tip drops? I don’t really cut the heater on unless it gets below 30. I have blankets. Lol
 
Sep 2013
47,146
38,562
On a hill
A couple of things. Per capita doesn’t really matter in the end game. What matters is total output. So I DO agree that it would be better if China “saved us.” Because of their output. And if we could rip off their technology? Even better (since they do it anyway). And that would benefit the world. I don’t disagree. But like I said in another post...I don’t trust Chinese government or business officials to do ANYTHING unless the cost makes sense. Nor do I trust them to do anything other than make grandiose statements. They aren’t really known as an honest government after all.

As for people? I don’t get it either. I live in Florida. So I get having AC on when it is super hot and stuff. I don’t want to be miserable just like anyone else. But when the tip drops? I don’t really cut the heater on unless it gets below 30. I have blankets. Lol
Youre correct about "total output", and that is a cumulative output spanning years, which keeps the US in the lead. Does it also include american factories moved to China?

Rather than being an issue of science policy, says Erwan Monier, a UC Davis climatologist, “I think the issue is more philosophical.” The idea that the U.S. should wait because other countries like China need to make more reductions than we do is “rhetoric that works perfectly for the status quo,” he says.

But the status quo is costly now, and it's going to become more costly in the future. "The climate system is going to respond to emissions," Monier says. Those responses are already having impacts around the United States and around the globe.

By waiting to act, the United States “puts the burden on others” to reduce emissions well beyond their commitments in the Paris Agreement “or it puts the burden on itself later on.” That latter scenario is much more likely, he says.

Had the US begun a transition to green energy back in the late 70s when Exxon's own scientists knew the impact of its product on climate change, we could have made a less disruptive move away from fossil fuels.

Exxon was aware of climate change, as early as 1977, 11 years before it became a public issue, according to a recent investigation from InsideClimate News. This knowledge did not prevent the company (now ExxonMobil and the world’s largest oil and gas company) from spending decades refusing to publicly acknowledge climate change and even promoting climate misinformation—an approach many have likened to the lies spread by the tobacco industry regarding the health risks of smoking. Both industries were conscious that their products wouldn’t stay profitable once the world understood the risks, so much so that they used the same consultants to develop strategies on how to communicate with the public.

Conservatives aligned with big oil continue to choose profits over not only human well being, but the health of the planet.
 
Dec 2018
5,739
2,334
Florida
Youre correct about "total output", and that is a cumulative output spanning years, which keeps the US in the lead. Does it also include american factories moved to China?



Had the US begun a transition to green energy back in the late 70s when Exxon's own scientists knew the impact of its product on climate change, we could have made a less disruptive move away from fossil fuels.



Conservatives aligned with big oil continue to choose profits over not only human well being, but the health of the planet.
Can you realistically expect people to turn away from major profits regardless of party? It isn’t just conservatives who are unscrupulous business people. You realize this right? This happens in every industry. And the most realistic way to bring that cost under control? Make it cheaper to be ethical.
 
Sep 2013
47,146
38,562
On a hill
Can you realistically expect people to turn away from major profits regardless of party? It isn’t just conservatives who are unscrupulous business people. You realize this right? This happens in every industry. And the most realistic way to bring that cost under control? Make it cheaper to be ethical.
According to free market theory, the market only works efficiently if consumers have perfect information - that means telling the truth. Because your business people dont behave ethically, we need government regulation.