• Rediphile@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Per capita emissions can only be calculated in relation to the total population. It’s a required part of the formula.

    Basically, I’d much prefer a world where 4 billion people get to live a life where pointless ‘for fun’ things like travel or going to a ski resort are ok emissions wise. I don’t at all want a world where 20 billion people have the same amount of emissions at the 4 billion mentioned above, but with 5x less resource use per person.

    What total world population do you feel is reasonable while also maintaining some semblance of quality of life?

    • DroneRights [it/its]@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      We can cut emissions hugely by eliminating plastic crap, building technology and tools to last, living in vibrant medium density neighbourhoods with public transit and bicycles for all, building renewable energy sources, and eliminating meat.

      I wake up in the morning, ride my bike to a job where I fix old technology and make a difference, then pick up groceries from local and sustainable businesses, get some exercise and sun in on my bike, and make a delicious vegan meal like roast potatoes. I’m happier, more active, healthier, and I feel like my life makes a difference. You, meanwhile, get to ride around in your metal box having to maintain constant focus or you could kill someone, getting no exercise, and presumably eating meat that hurts animals, wastes carbon, and kills you faster. Of course you need a vacation on a plane to make you happy; your life is miserable.