Difference is that, those problems had relatively easier solution which was being worked on. This does not hold for global warming, we are not even trying!
Honestly, it’s pathetic that you try to look at things rose-tinted. Is it that hard to accept imminent crisis?
Difference is that, those problems had relatively easier solution which was being worked on.
It required global cooperation to ban CFC’s and restore the ozone layer. It required destroying large corporations so the the rivers could be clean again. These things were done and can continue to be done.
This does not hold for global warming, we are not even trying!
Absolutely not true. 1.08 terawatts of power are solar in China. 1.6Terrawatts in US. 107.6 GW in Germany. France has always been Nuclear. Massive EV adoption in China and Europe.
it’s pathetic that you try to look at things rose-tinted
I grew up in the 1970’s when you couldn’t swim or fish in the rivers. The city was filthy, and not in today’s sanitized “oh there’s some trash”. Every surface in the city was covered in black grime. Moths in cities evolved into black variations because cities weren’t white concrete- they were black grime.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
Climate change isn’t the same as cleaning up litter? It’s on a global scale of gigatons of emissions, involving every industrialized nation all interacting together with the environment.
This is bigger than anything in human history. Stop fucking comparing it to cleaning up some fucking tires in a river.
Lake Erie was dead from pollution. The Cuyahoga River in Ohio was so polluted it caught fire.
I misunderstood the examples given, I figured they were filled with trash, looking it up I see trash was only part of the problem.
But that doesn’t actually change my point! Cleaning up toxic waste at a single lake or river site isn’t the same as cleaning the atmosphere of the entire fucking planet. It’s absurd to put these on the same scale as climate change.
We don’t even have the technology to clean the atmosphere on a human timescale, and it might not even be possible.
I already mentioned CFC’s which required global cooperation on a scale never seen before.
CFCs were only emitted from a few specific industries and could be eliminated with existing alternatives, and they weren’t the basis for the entire economy. CFCs are also not present in the atmosphere for very long and they decay very quickly, and were only present at a little over 1 part per billion. They’re already falling because eliminating them was easy.
We’re at 415 parts per million in CO2 concentrations. That’s orders of magnitude in difference, and the carbon that is already present will take multiple human lifetimes to be removed via natural means. And it’s still getting worse.
CFCs were baby shit compared to this crisis of civilization.
Cleaning up toxic waste at a single lake or river site
It wasn’t a single river and single lake. It was everywhere. There wasn’t a clean river, large lake or bay in the US. The examples I gave were only the most publicized.
The air in all cities, everywhere, was so polluted the moths evolved to be black.
We’re at 415 parts per million in CO2 concentrations. That’s orders of magnitude in difference, and the carbon that is already present will take multiple human lifetimes to be removed via natural means.
Unchecked CFC’s would have resulted in the sterilization of the entire planet. In the 1970’s pollution was at a level where all life was destroyed in many local ecologies. It wasn’t “It’s too hot here so native species died out and were replaced with desert species.” It was complete annihilation of all life in the area.
Global warming means a few billion die. It’s an extremely serious problem but we are improving.
Difference is that, those problems had relatively easier solution which was being worked on. This does not hold for global warming, we are not even trying!
Honestly, it’s pathetic that you try to look at things rose-tinted. Is it that hard to accept imminent crisis?
It required global cooperation to ban CFC’s and restore the ozone layer. It required destroying large corporations so the the rivers could be clean again. These things were done and can continue to be done.
Absolutely not true. 1.08 terawatts of power are solar in China. 1.6Terrawatts in US. 107.6 GW in Germany. France has always been Nuclear. Massive EV adoption in China and Europe.
I grew up in the 1970’s when you couldn’t swim or fish in the rivers. The city was filthy, and not in today’s sanitized “oh there’s some trash”. Every surface in the city was covered in black grime. Moths in cities evolved into black variations because cities weren’t white concrete- they were black grime. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution
Statues were crumbling from acid rain.
The world is so much cleaner than 50 years ago.
This is what has been done recently:
Past improvements don’t mean we need to stop!
Climate change isn’t the same as cleaning up litter? It’s on a global scale of gigatons of emissions, involving every industrialized nation all interacting together with the environment.
This is bigger than anything in human history. Stop fucking comparing it to cleaning up some fucking tires in a river.
I didn’t mention cleaning up litter at all! In fact I specifically said it wasn’t.
I already mentioned CFC’s which required global cooperation on a scale never seen before.
Everything is bigger than anying human history because we have more people.
WHAT THE FUCK? QUOTE ME.
I misunderstood the examples given, I figured they were filled with trash, looking it up I see trash was only part of the problem.
But that doesn’t actually change my point! Cleaning up toxic waste at a single lake or river site isn’t the same as cleaning the atmosphere of the entire fucking planet. It’s absurd to put these on the same scale as climate change.
We don’t even have the technology to clean the atmosphere on a human timescale, and it might not even be possible.
CFCs were only emitted from a few specific industries and could be eliminated with existing alternatives, and they weren’t the basis for the entire economy. CFCs are also not present in the atmosphere for very long and they decay very quickly, and were only present at a little over 1 part per billion. They’re already falling because eliminating them was easy.
We’re at 415 parts per million in CO2 concentrations. That’s orders of magnitude in difference, and the carbon that is already present will take multiple human lifetimes to be removed via natural means. And it’s still getting worse.
CFCs were baby shit compared to this crisis of civilization.
EDIT Oh I forgot, wanna know something funny? Those CFC alternatives we’re using actually contribute to climate change.
That also means we have more enemies, and at the moment those enemies are controlling the US government.
It wasn’t a single river and single lake. It was everywhere. There wasn’t a clean river, large lake or bay in the US. The examples I gave were only the most publicized.
The air in all cities, everywhere, was so polluted the moths evolved to be black.
https://ocean.si.edu/ocean-life/plants-algae/signs-recovering-harbor#%3A~%3Atext=In+the+1970s%2C+43+communities%2Cof+Shame”+in+the+1980s!
https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2024/baltimores-swimmable-harbor-movement#%3A~%3Atext=Until+the+1970s%2C+inland+industries%2Cfilter+and+refresh+the+water.
https://www.californiasun.co/photos-when-l-a-smog-was-so-bad-people-suspected-a-gas-attack/
Unchecked CFC’s would have resulted in the sterilization of the entire planet. In the 1970’s pollution was at a level where all life was destroyed in many local ecologies. It wasn’t “It’s too hot here so native species died out and were replaced with desert species.” It was complete annihilation of all life in the area.
Global warming means a few billion die. It’s an extremely serious problem but we are improving.
https://rhg.com/research/preliminary-us-greenhouse-gas-estimates-for-2024/