SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419/full
Humanity is causing a rapid loss of biodiversity and, with it, Earth's ability to support complex life. But the mainstream is having difficulty grasping the magnitude of this loss, despite the steady erosion of the fabric of human civilization (Ceballos et al., 2015; IPBES, 2019; Convention on Biological Diversity, 2020; WWF, 2020). While suggested solutions abound (Díaz et al., 2019), the current scale of their implementation does not match the relentless progression of biodiversity loss (Cumming et al., 2006) and other existential threats tied to the continuous expansion of the human enterprise (Rees, 2020). Time delays between ecological deterioration and socio-economic penalties, as with climate disruption for example (IPCC, 2014), impede recognition of the magnitude of the challenge and timely counteraction needed. In addition, disciplinary specialization and insularity encourage unfamiliarity with the complex adaptive systems (Levin, 1999) in which problems and their potential solutions are embedded (Selby, 2006; Brand and Karvonen, 2007). Widespread ignorance of human behavior (Van Bavel et al., 2020) and the incremental nature of socio-political processes that plan and implement solutions further delay effective action (Shanley and López, 2009; King, 2016).
We summarize the state of the natural world in stark form here to help clarify the gravity of the human predicament. We also outline likely future trends in biodiversity decline (Díaz et al., 2019), climate disruption (Ripple et al., 2020), and human consumption and population growth to demonstrate the near certainty that these problems will worsen over the coming decades, with negative impacts for centuries to come. Finally, we discuss the ineffectiveness of current and planned actions that are attempting to address the ominous erosion of Earth's life-support system. Ours is not a call to surrender—we aim to provide leaders with a realistic "cold shower" of the state of the planet that is essential for planning to avoid a ghastly future.
Journal Reference:
Corey J. A. Bradshaw, Paul R. Ehrlich, Andrew Beattie. et al. Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future, Frontiers in Conservation Science [OPEN] (DOI: 10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419)
(Score: 2) by turgid on Saturday January 23 2021, @07:58PM (2 children)
Get a grip, brave Mr AC. At least khallow has the guts to troll under his account.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 24 2021, @01:29AM (1 child)
While the AC you are responding to comes across as a dick. There is a valid point in his comment.
The environmental damage from mining, fossil fuel extraction, and CO2 emissions embodied in the manufacturing of two cars is huge, and they being hybrids doesn't make up for that (EV doesn't either).
I bought a small fuel efficient hatchback in an attempt to do less harm (when I purchased it, its lifetime CO2 emissions [including manufacture, operation and disposal] was estimated to be lower than all hybrid passenger cars on the market except one, and that hybrid was more than double the price of the hatchback), but I realize that by purchasing and driving that car, I am contributing to the problem. Not to the degree as the flag waving moron in a giant SUV, but still pushing things in the wrong direction.
I don't think our species has the foresight and willingness to put others' interests (in this case, future generations and other species) ahead of their own, if it means any kind of deprivation. And, I believe it will take a lot more than driving hybrids and small fuel efficient cars, or even EVs to make a material difference in our trajectory.
So, yeah the dick AC is right that even people who care are still not doing what is necessary since that would result in a negative impact upon our lifestyles that we apparently are not willing to make.
- a fellow hypocrite
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Sunday January 24 2021, @06:59PM
Buying a car at all is just contributing to the problem, as is living in a place where you need to have a car to live a reasonably comfortable life. Humans, by and large, should not own personal cars at all: they should be mostly living in cities (small or large) where the density is high, the city is walkable, and they can get around by walking, cycling, and by train/subway. We have cities like this now, just not in America (except NYC, which isn't doing so hot right now because of long-term mismanagement plus Covid). If you want to see how humans can live very well and without a car, just travel to Japan. There's various cities in Europe that do a reasonably good job too.