, 48 tweets, 7 min read Read on Twitter
"Now to be clear, these things are not fictions or fabrications…I mean there IS an environmental crises (though the nature of this crises seems still rather opaque) and there is a vicious incremental genocide going on in Gaza."

counterpunch.org/2019/03/19/day…
This makes me want to absolutely scream. What is opaque? @johnsteppling Please there's mountains of data. Read an IPCC report. What is opaque??
That's IPCC SR15, it models our current track. Under that model we hit 1.5C above pre-industrial by 2040, and 2C above pre-industrial by 2050.
The purple lines and shaded areas are complete climate inaction, the Business As Usual scenario - commonly abbreviated to BAU - this is our current track.
I don't know where to begin. For the love of GOD if you have ANY climate change related questions please ask them in this thread. -Everyone- should know and understand climate change.
I mean there's MOUNTAINS of data, reports, articles. Come on!
I predict no one will ask a question, no matter how little they know. The nature of climate change is "opaque" because not only do people not seek out info, they actively AVOID learning about climate change.
Because it's at least exactly as dire as they think. Because it's really far more dire than they think. But don't pretend.
It's your absolute duty as a human being to learn everything you can about this crisis of unprecedented scale and threat. This is your DUTY as a human. It's what you owe to yourself, your family, society, the planet itself. Please I am begging all of you, stop this NOW go READ.
Maybe I can begin with solutions, since John wrote, "The fight for ecological well being begins with fighting these things, not supporting quisling Democrats." About which he's rather correct.
The things he's referring to are war, imperialism, militarization generally (police), white supremacy, genocide, capitalism, fascism.
The real solution to the climate change crisis, as with all things, is the total abolishment of class, elimination of capitalism, expropriation of the ruling class. MINIMALLY, as prerequisite.
So we can identify first what are certainly NOT solutions. The Malthusian Hitlerian eugenic program of Gates and Clinton, reduction of population in "undesirable" countries - this was also the NZ shooter's view - is plainly not a solution even accepting its anti-human premise.
Look at the time-scale we're working on. Population reduction if its not outright genocide cannot be achieved within 30 or 40 years, that's obvious. We will have blown past 1.5C certainly and in a BAU scenario it's likely to be 2C by then.
The GND, besides being a bottom to top wealth transfer, has put all its stock in techno-miracle climate scrubbing. Two things here: the GND has VERY little in terms of carbon emissions reduction, this is BY FAR the most necessary step to resolving climate change;
there is NO climate scrubbing tech to speak of whatsoever, LET ALONE one that is profitable. The best-going climate scrubbing tech, BECCS (bio-energy with carbon capture and storage) is not in any way able to resolve climate change on its own.
To scrub 10 billion tons of CO2 BECCS would require an area larger than India. 38.2 billion tons of CO2 are pumped into the atmosphere PER YEAR.
And this for non-existent tech. We know we can make it but right now there's no climate scrubbing tech that works on any scale that matters, full stop.
However, and to shed some light on the enormity of this crisis, we ABSOLUTELY need to develop climate scrubbing technology. All climate scientists, the IPCC as well, agree that negative emissions are a non-negotiable solution to climate change.
What they do not say is that it's THE solution to climate change. It's a requirement alongside drastic emissions reduction. But why?
We do not have a thoroughgoing understanding of the relationship between atmospheric CO2 ppm and warming. That is to say we do not know to what degree carbon CURRENTLY in the atmosphere impacts warming.
Let's say we bring carbon emissions to zero tomorrow. It's fairly obvious that the world will not also stop warming tomorrow. When will it stop warming then? In a year? Five? Ten? We plainly don't know.
How much warming is current atmospheric concentration of CO2 going to be responsible for? We don't know. In other words we could bring emissions to zero tomorrow and the world may very well still warm to 1.5C, 2C, and so on.
It would be slower, certainly, but atmospheric CO2 still needs to be addressed.
The only way out of this crisis is to bring emissions to zero AND achieve negative emissions.
The real solution to the climate change crisis, as with all things, is the total abolishment of class, elimination of capitalism, expropriation of the ruling class. MINIMALLY, as prerequisite.
It's maybe necessary to clarify my insistence on using a 2C rise as a basic marker of untenability.
On the one hand, it's obvious, as this what the Paris Agreement (worthless, mind) set as its goal - citing 2C as a threshold beyond which society essentially cannot function.
But I use it for an altogether different reason, namely that a 2C rise is not unlikely to trigger a rapid slide to 4C.

theguardian.com/environment/20…
You'll notice at the end of the article a climate scientist more or less handwaving this paper's findings. It's difficult for me to accept that as there's little more consistent in climate change than overly-conservative estimations.
It's absolutely routine to read that one or another estimation has been found to be woefully too low or that it has been blown on a time-scale much, much shorter than anticipated.
We won't be able to mitigate the slide in the necessary time frame, and that's a CERTAINTY without negative emissions.
Besides being absurdly inhospitable to human life, really ALL life save for some extreme forms, a 4C rise locks in an 8C via the loss of clouds.

nature.com/articles/s4156…
In my estimation it's likely that a 2C rise altogether dooms the planet to uncontrollable and extreme warming, anything that allows 2C by mid-century is not a reasonable solution.
Another solution, or set of solutions, is the demand that YOU change your lifestyle to resolve climate change.
Although it's necessary to make adjustments to lifestyle, consumption-based CO2 pollution accounts for at best 25% of carbon emissions. Or to state it in a way that properly frames the issue: 75% of carbon emissions is from industry.
Demands that YOU change your life, and YOU give your money over to the ruling class (like GND would have), are little more than a climate-change version of blaming the erosion of working class wealth on the working class (welfare queens, immigrants taking your job, et al).
While elites travel in the most climate damaging possible, with absurd frequency - private air travel - they demand that YOU consider biking. That YOU buy an EV. And so on.
At the same time that they sabotage EV technology and production (this was most obvious in the late 90s but continues today). Remember that manufacturers didn't produce EVs until there was overwhelming demand AND government SUBSIDY.
You're asked to consume less in a world with planned obsolescence, where plastic is present in just about any damn thing you can buy, with rail systems and public transportation that are woefully inadequate and cost prohibitive, and so on.
The carbon footprint of any given ruling class person is several orders of magnitude greater than that of a working class person. Period. To say nothing of corporations. No more austerity for the masses and luxury for polluters and expropriaters. Enough!
I feel obliged to continue this thread. Heating and cooling mansions. Heating and cooling UNLIVED-IN properties. Yachts. Multiple cars. Only wearing in-season clothing, tossing away things less than a year old. Watering and maintaining thousand plus acre properties.
And on and on. It's absolutely nauseating. And on luxury brands, from the corporate end: it's not even a secret now that they actively DESTROY unsold stock to maintain the price of luxury items.
I mean the breadth of this consumption and reproduction of consumption is astonishing, astonishing. But you're chastised for using a straw. Fuck off!
For clarity your net worth needs to be ~93k USD to land in the 10% of the world's richest
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Grimealectic
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!