Thanks so very much, Hannah. One of your most important contributions is to remind people of what is facing billions of humans right now, and what we can and are doing about it, rather than spreading the Gospel of Doom about the future (and helping put TFG back in power)
Thank you so much. That's very insightful and makes me hopeful. I am wondering: do you know if the reductions in richer countries are really caused by more efficiency / better technologies or might have anything to do with outsourcing or with changing to technologies that cause harm in other areas (e.g. land use)?
I recommend her recent appearance on the Ezra Klein Show. Ezra also poses this question to her. It’s a great episode that you can easily search for on the web or your podcast app.
“…do you know if the reductions in richer countries are really caused by more efficiency / better technologies or might have anything to do with outsourcing”
-Nice question! But Ms Ritchie will not unswer to you
It’s actually a question she has answered many times. It’s also answered in the data - the international totals can’t be peaking if rich countries had fully exported their problems. And in where pollution is produced- a huge amount comes from electricity generation and road transport which you cannot export.
Please help the world be a better place and use Google next time :)
Thanks for this Hannah. A more accurate title might be The World has (probably) reached peak emissions for some types of air pollution. I say emissions as many types of pollution take time to break down so slowing the rate of new emissions only decreases the pollution growth rate.
Think of the amount of trash in your garage if you didn't have a waste disposal service...cutting your weekly trash by 10% wouldn't prevent your garage from filling up unless you opened your garage door and let some blow away. Of course, then others would be effected by your trash.
There is not a single thing (Or a complex set of things) that we humans can do to the earth that would not be shrugged off in a couple of thousand years.
To think there is, is the height of hubris and frankly anti-science thinking.
The earth went through 5 mass extinctions and look at it today - of course, it'll be fine after after a couple of thousand years after.
But there's no obligation on earth's part to keep it hospitable for the species living on it, while it goes through this cycle. We will be wiped away, along with most of the other species
When one stops to think that the High Priests of climate change (Not the rank and file, believers) all are 100% in to the WEF global depopulation agenda, I am pretty sure they would be all right with the planet shrugging us off.
In the end, it will be the end and there is nothing that anyone in humanity can do about it.
But, there is a delicious amount of money that will buy real and tangible goods for right now, so, like every priest before them, they will pass the plate and keep the faith going by any means necessary. In Climate Changes case, it will be unrealized doom and gloom.
Can you explain to me how poor countries are poor? Where are happening the minning nowdays? Why these countries have so many policies toward the privatization of their resources to richer countries? The answer is not simple, neither the solution. There's not An Enemy, but at the same time its easier these days imagine the end of the world than the end of this "Democracy".
Another great insight Hannah! I started a company that makes high-performance air purifiers, and have recently turned my attention to addressing the root causes of air pollution. This is great to see that developed nations are cutting down on polluting the air — especially with particulate matter, SO2, NOx, and NMVOCs. Air pollution is one of the great challenges of our time.
Ms Ritchie does not want to break out of her way of thinking and contests the concept of Degrowth. Timothée Parraque's challenge to her book “Not the End of the world” is interesting:
Luis, the way you structure your comment makes me believe that you would frame anyone not agreeing with you as "not wanting to break out of their way of thinking". You're welcome to think that but you are not going to change anybody's mind with that approach!
Luis - this sentence on the link you provided dims up my objections: “Degrowth comes with its own political, social, and economic challenges, which is another discussion altogether, but it has the benefits of being fast, effective, and reversible. It is fast because it impacts footprints today. Closing national flight routes means less planes in the air today, compared to technological improvements in fuel efficiency that unfolds over longer periods of time. “
Exactly how do you expect to a achieve regrowth short of a world autocracy?
Thanks so very much, Hannah. One of your most important contributions is to remind people of what is facing billions of humans right now, and what we can and are doing about it, rather than spreading the Gospel of Doom about the future (and helping put TFG back in power)
Thank you so much. That's very insightful and makes me hopeful. I am wondering: do you know if the reductions in richer countries are really caused by more efficiency / better technologies or might have anything to do with outsourcing or with changing to technologies that cause harm in other areas (e.g. land use)?
I recommend her recent appearance on the Ezra Klein Show. Ezra also poses this question to her. It’s a great episode that you can easily search for on the web or your podcast app.
Thanks Luis.
“…do you know if the reductions in richer countries are really caused by more efficiency / better technologies or might have anything to do with outsourcing”
-Nice question! But Ms Ritchie will not unswer to you
Why? Too embarrassing
It’s actually a question she has answered many times. It’s also answered in the data - the international totals can’t be peaking if rich countries had fully exported their problems. And in where pollution is produced- a huge amount comes from electricity generation and road transport which you cannot export.
Please help the world be a better place and use Google next time :)
Thanks for this Hannah. A more accurate title might be The World has (probably) reached peak emissions for some types of air pollution. I say emissions as many types of pollution take time to break down so slowing the rate of new emissions only decreases the pollution growth rate.
Think of the amount of trash in your garage if you didn't have a waste disposal service...cutting your weekly trash by 10% wouldn't prevent your garage from filling up unless you opened your garage door and let some blow away. Of course, then others would be effected by your trash.
For a deeper dive into pollution check out https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/pollution/ and https://www.nrdc.org/stories/forever-chemicals-called-pfas-show-your-food-clothes-and-home
We can probably expect the adoption of precision agriculture in the coming decade to radically reduce ammonia emissions and production as well.
There is not a single thing (Or a complex set of things) that we humans can do to the earth that would not be shrugged off in a couple of thousand years.
To think there is, is the height of hubris and frankly anti-science thinking.
The earth went through 5 mass extinctions and look at it today - of course, it'll be fine after after a couple of thousand years after.
But there's no obligation on earth's part to keep it hospitable for the species living on it, while it goes through this cycle. We will be wiped away, along with most of the other species
When one stops to think that the High Priests of climate change (Not the rank and file, believers) all are 100% in to the WEF global depopulation agenda, I am pretty sure they would be all right with the planet shrugging us off.
In the end, it will be the end and there is nothing that anyone in humanity can do about it.
But, there is a delicious amount of money that will buy real and tangible goods for right now, so, like every priest before them, they will pass the plate and keep the faith going by any means necessary. In Climate Changes case, it will be unrealized doom and gloom.
Any chance that this data could be confounded by COVID related impacts?
“Estimates”
Pulled out of some PhD’s computer modelled butt!
Whoopee!
Ecology without class struggle is just gardening.
Can you explain to me how poor countries are poor? Where are happening the minning nowdays? Why these countries have so many policies toward the privatization of their resources to richer countries? The answer is not simple, neither the solution. There's not An Enemy, but at the same time its easier these days imagine the end of the world than the end of this "Democracy".
Another great insight Hannah! I started a company that makes high-performance air purifiers, and have recently turned my attention to addressing the root causes of air pollution. This is great to see that developed nations are cutting down on polluting the air — especially with particulate matter, SO2, NOx, and NMVOCs. Air pollution is one of the great challenges of our time.
This is welcome news especially in light of newer research telling us that even what we consider low levels of air pollution can be harmful https://www.med.ubc.ca/news/even-low-levels-of-air-pollution-contribute-to-increased-health-risk/
Ms Ritchie does not want to break out of her way of thinking and contests the concept of Degrowth. Timothée Parraque's challenge to her book “Not the End of the world” is interesting:
https://timotheeparrique.com/a-response-to-hannah-ritchie-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-and-love-economic-growth/
Luis, the way you structure your comment makes me believe that you would frame anyone not agreeing with you as "not wanting to break out of their way of thinking". You're welcome to think that but you are not going to change anybody's mind with that approach!
Luis - this sentence on the link you provided dims up my objections: “Degrowth comes with its own political, social, and economic challenges, which is another discussion altogether, but it has the benefits of being fast, effective, and reversible. It is fast because it impacts footprints today. Closing national flight routes means less planes in the air today, compared to technological improvements in fuel efficiency that unfolds over longer periods of time. “
Exactly how do you expect to a achieve regrowth short of a world autocracy?