this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2023
548 points (81.6% liked)

World News

33464 readers
795 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

German energy giant RWE has begun dismantling a wind farm to make way for a further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia.

I thought renewables were cheaper than coal. How is this possible?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 125 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Ban straws! (even though disabled people need them and they create negligible pollution)

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

Reduce your carbon footprint! (even though its a term we invented ourselves to shift responsibility to you, while we fly our private jets around creating more pollution than you ever could in 10 lifetimes)

Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don't want to pay to actually recycle it)

All equates to

Look the other way while we continue to rape the planet and blame it on you!!!

Never forget - capitalists (and the governments they're co-dependent on) only want more money, they don't car about you or me or the planet, only about themsleves and the numbers in their accounts, and they will never willingly stop doing whatever it takes to make more.

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 64 points 2 years ago (1 children)

or the source of the electricity it uses

Oh, quit this noise. In the same countries where electric cars are becoming common, wind/water/sun-produced energy is also on the rise. Electric cars decouple the energy used from the means of production in ways that gasoline will never have, and the potential outweighs the temporary conditions of power generation in socially backward areas like Darfur and America.

[–] napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de 49 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

While I partly agree with your argument at the end of your comment, I think your examples are really unfitting.

Only single-use plastic straws are banned. There is also an exemption for straws that are necessary for medical reasons. The needs of disabled people are included in the exemption. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-003536-ASW_EN.html

If people buy a new car, the old one (if still functional) typically enters the second-hand market, not the landfill. There is no reason why this would be different if the new car is an electric vehicle.

The carbon footprint is a perfectly fine concept on its own, the problem is just that some people shit on it with their private jets, which are a legitimate concern. Some people also argue that "most of the pollution is done by corporations, not individuals", completely ignoring the fact that these corporations only do it while producing goods for the people. That does not mean that we can just blame the people for it, but everybody has the responsibility to vote for policies that keep the corporations in check.

Recycling is really bad in some countries, but works pretty well in others. For example in Germany 56% of plastic waste is recycled, 44% burned. 90% of paper is recycled. https://www.quarks.de/umwelt/muell/das-solltest-du-ueber-recycling-wissen/#l%C3%B6sung4

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

We've made electric powered airplane jet turbines. If the rich want private jets, we should require those to be EVs. I don't give a shit that the tech is untested, and neither do they judging by that "submarine."

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The problem is we are only talking about a small fraction of the trash. >90% of waste is industrial waste, of that a third is just from Construction/Demolition.

Consumers can recycle everything, but it won't make more than a 10% impact. We need to start forcing industry to recycle and we can start with concrete. 8% of all global emissions are from concrete production, that's not even accounting the energy to haul it around. We have the ability today to use concrete to make down cycled products on site (road base, filler, non structural blocks, etc) eliminating transportation and other impacts. But few even consider it, companies and customers don't want to wait the extra day that it takes, and it's not always profitable either.

[–] mineapple@feddit.de 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I doubt your numbers are factual. Depending on the industry, you'll have very specific, non mixed waste materials, which would be way easier to recycle than mixed trash from households.

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I just had to do a project on this for work and almost if not all of those numbers most likely came from the EPA's site from the studies they reference. Other sources, including international sources are similar, I have no reason to doubt the veracity or the figures.

When rereading your comment I get the impression you think I am saying only 10% of industrial waste is recycled. That is not that statement, the statement is simply 90% of waste in landfill is industrial.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works -5 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Do you think cars are immortal, and are just passed on from owner to owner for all eternity?

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 3 points 2 years ago

Only East German ones. Then the pigs eat some rotten parts off of them, and the remainder is reassembled into fewer cars. The circle of life. The last people on this planet will still be driving a Trabi.

[–] napoleonsdumbcousin@feddit.de 3 points 2 years ago

No? Nobody thinks that?

My comment was just a response to the following:

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

...which for some reason suggests that the introduction of electric cars leads to premature scrapping of existing cars - which is bullshit.

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Cuban cars are

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 19 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Replace your car with an electric one! (even though it still works fine and will end up in landfill, never mind the environmental cost of producing the new one, or the source of the electricity it uses)

A new EV breaks even with a used car in less than a decade. It does not matter if it is getting its energy from coal, it still will emit less carbon within a decade.

Recycle! (even though 90% of it ends up in landfill anyway because we don't want to pay to actually recycle it)

90% of plastic recycling. That is thanks to the oil companies who saw backlash against the ridiculous amount of plastic in the 70s and decided to invent a resin code whose symbol mimicked the recycling symbol. Recycling centers were flooded with a ton of plastic which they did not have infrastructure to actually recycle. China took it for a couple decades and then it became unprofitable for them. Basically only resin codes 1 and 2 are recyclable. But most people think all of it is. Absolutely recycle metals. If your city has recycling pickup and you are not recycling stuff like aluminum, you kind of suck.

[–] MightEnlightenYou@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago

I'm from Sweden, we're among the best in the world at recycling. We have closed all our landfills and even import combustible trash to burn for energy (we clean the fumes extremely well).

Every time I see a discussion about trash anywhere in the world I get sad that people are so uninformed about what's possible.

One Swedish company, Swedish Plastic Recycling, is currently building a recycling plant that will be able to handle ALL of the country's plastic waste and automatically recycle almost all of the kinds of plastic there are.

This is even profitable if done right.

Sources upon request.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

Absolutely recycle metals

You don't need to; all trash, no matter the bin, goes under a magnet that will pick out anything ferromagnetic, and through an induction trap that will pick out non-ferromagnetic metals. Even if for some reason it gets dumped in a landfill, it's still possible to mine it out.

Aluminum in particular is more expensive to mine+refine than to recycle. Some places you can even throw it on the ground, and someone will pick it up to sell for recycling. Copper you can get even stolen from you, and don't start me on Palladium, some people will "recycle" the catalytic converter from your car if you don't park it in a safe place.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Basically only resin codes 1 and 2 are recyclable. But most people think all of it is

I read somewhere that this is false and all of them are recyclable. Don't quote me on it though.

[–] Rambi@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago

I think you can technically recycle probably almost any plastic, perhaps almost any material in general. It's just a question of if the recycling process is affordable and competes in price with just buying the unrecycled version of that plastic. So other plastics besides PET and HDPE I'm sure you can recycle, it's just that the cost is prohibitive.

[–] SeaJ@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago

Technically yes but there has to be the infrastructure to do it. Most cities cannot process them. It's also generally not profitable and does not save much from an emissions standpoint either.

[–] smollittlefrog@lemdro.id -5 points 2 years ago (5 children)

Luckily many people live in democracies where they can simply vote to enact climate policies.

Sadly most people living in those democracies choose to continue enabling climate change.

The reason nothing is being done against climate change isn't corrupt politicians. It's the millions of people voting for them.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Lol, no.

The fault lies with those who built and benefit from the system, not those trapped in it who are merely given the illusion of choice.

Get off your high horse and aim your anger at the right people, otherwise all you are doing is enabling their rigged system.

[–] smollittlefrog@lemdro.id 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Your first link is US only, your second link is about a completely seperate issue. You don't need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

In Germany, where I live, the voters could easily vote for the greens "Grüne" and the left "Linke".

If those two parties had a majority in government, we'd have a climate friendly system in no time.

But they don't. We had a conservative government for 16 years. Now we have a center government, which sadly includes the small government / free market party "FDP", blocking all significant progress.

No systemic oppression stops people from voting Left/Greens. But they never did, and never will.

There's now an uprise of the far right party "AfD" in Germany, to the point it's becoming one of the major parties.

In Germany people have the choice readily available to stop actively damaging the climate.

But every couple of years, they freely choose to not do that.

I feel like many left-wing people regularly forget about the billions of people who genuinely do not care to do anything about climate change.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

You don’t need to dismantle capitalism to protect the climate.

You absolutely do. If it was profitable to destroy the envrionment capitalism would do it in a heartbeat. And guess what it IS profitable to destroy the environment, that is why it is happening! You cannot protect the environment under capitalism.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 0 points 2 years ago

When you try to dismantle capitalism... you get capitalism under a different name, with a dictator on top of it. Better hope the dictator wants to protect the environment, and that he knows how to! (see: Great Chinese Famine)

[–] smollittlefrog@lemdro.id -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You can limit capitalism without abolishing it.

In Germany people are guaranteed 20/24 paid vacation days. That's not profitable.

That's a limit imposed on capitalism. It can be done and has been done without abolishing capitalism.

That's just one of the thousands of policies that limit capitalism.

You can limit capitalism (as literally every capitalist nation does) without abolishing it.

Enforcing climate friendlyness would be just another limit.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

When you try to limit capitalism you get nuclear plants being shut down and coal plants being opened and the environment still being destroyed.

[–] nik282000@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago

Most people don't have a 'green' option for which they can vote.

We won’t touch the Greenbelt.

-Doug Ford, 2018

Ford says he's confident nothing criminal took place in Greenbelt land swap amid RCMP probe.

-CBC news, 2023

Not that he was a green leaning politician to begin with but this is just another example of blatant lies used by politicians to get elected and totally fuckover their country.

[–] lntl@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

We must elect a Supreme Chancellor to get us through these tough times.

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

No they can't? If it was as simple as voting for green policies we'd see more of them. The only thing people can do is vote for greenwashed policies that do not impact the bottom line of industry.