• CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      The UK likes to go the other way by talking up a ridiculous goal and then immediately failing it, like "Our goal is to produce zero CO2 and become the global leader in renewables by 2025” and then immediately open a new coal mine.

    • Samsy@lemmy.ml
      ·
      10 months ago

      Yes, but the goals in germany are written into a law, and the highest council actually blaming the government for failed goals.

      • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]
        ·
        10 months ago

        The kind of law where people go to jail or the kind of law people have long televised meetings and write op eds?

      • Gosplan14_the_Third [none/use name]
        ·
        10 months ago

        The government has more interest in pursuing the global power ambitions of the Standort Deutschland rather than accomplishing environmental goals, even in spite of one of the parties being named Die Grünen (which is basically just good PR for them and nothing of substance) - and the goals that are being pursued anyway are all to the slogan of Cem Özdemir "Zwischen Wirtschaft und Umwelt gehört kein oder". Environmentalism as long as it remains profitable, even at costs of +2, +2,5, +3 or more °C

        The next elections are sure to be won by Merz, with or without the AfD, and very likely to have the FDP in influential ministries, so nothing will change - or perhaps even for the worse.

        That's what happens when the main goal of production is not the goal of creating socially necessary goods, but to insert money into the labor process and end up with more than you had at the beginning.

    • I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.ml
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s amazing how all these countries set weak goal

      It's can kicking. Make a promise for something 25 years in the future. Who cares if the country can't meet it? You'll likely be out of office or retired by that point. That's the next person's problem.

      • Kuori [she/her]
        ·
        10 months ago

        That's the next person's problem.

        it is until people start getting organized and seeking justice on those responsible

    • jabjoe@feddit.uk
      ·
      10 months ago

      I'm much more optimistic, though I do think it will get worse before it gets better. I think we'll end up with a few mass killer enviromental events before humans start to save themselves properly. It'll never be too late as Earth is always going to better than anywhere else for us.

      Quick list of things hopeful in my feeds of the top of my head.

      • Renewable energy is the cheapest energy.
      • Agrivoltaics can increase yeilds while also providing power.
      • Home Solar & battery pay back time is coming down all the time.
      • Electric cars are the cheapest over their life time and the upfront costs are tumbling.
      • Electrification of more and more transport types is happening to save costs.
      • EVs are going V2H/V2G/V2X which means you get a large home (and office?) battery to take part in energy markets.
      • Second life EV batteries will eventury be a source of larger, cheaper, home batteries.
      • Just the other day another methane solution : https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/22/bacteria-that-eats-methane-could-slow-global-heating-study-finds
      • Fusion looks closer than 50 years out now.
      • RightToRepair + OpenSource is slowly spreading and will reduce life time costs and reduce e-waste. Regulators are waking up too.
      • Vertical farming is developing and will end up cheaper.
      • Lab meat or precision fermentation is a path to animal free animal protein at lower costs.
      • 5 minute cities as an idea is spreading.
      • Covid has normalized WFH
      • Green spaces in cities to cool them and improve mental health is increasingly being talked about and pushed in some forward thinking cities.
      • Peak population is constantly revised down and sooner. Once population starts to fall, it's not set to stop for a long time.

      There is a lot of movement. It's all about aligning economics with fighting climate change. Which is natural as using less to do the same thing is better for both.

      One thing that is a very good sign is oil companies are scared. They are spending a lot of money pumping out FUD. Doom peddling to slow climate action, but economics is against them. Even without climate damage being costed in. Which governments will do when oil is less powerful.

      Fight the doom!

      • Tankiedesantski [he/him]
        ·
        10 months ago

        Some of the things you listed are indeed good, but we're not going to avert climate catastrophe unless we reject the idea that we can only do good things if they're less expensive than the bad thing alternative.

        • jabjoe@feddit.uk
          ·
          10 months ago

          I think it's the way to ease the masses in. You also missing that the other end is to make the bad stuff expensive. Bring environmental cost on to the balance sheet. Criminalize and enforce those laws, environmental crimes. Carrot and stick.

            • jabjoe@feddit.uk
              ·
              10 months ago

              Democracy is for that. In Australia, Teals won on a partly climate agenda. It helps that solar is a no brainer there. Also non-fossil money wants cheaper energy, so is increasing finding itself assigned with the environment against fossil fuels.