this post was submitted on 12 Sep 2023
46 points (97.9% liked)

Green - An environmentalist community

5310 readers
1 users here now

This is the place to discuss environmentalism, preservation, direct action and anything related to it!


RULES:

1- Remember the human

2- Link posts should come from a reputable source

3- All opinions are allowed but discussion must be in good faith


Related communities:


Unofficial Chat rooms:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

OK this article is infuriating, as is the product it's hyping up.

If 2.5% of our emissions is going toward feeding 4 billion people then I'm totally fine with letting those emissions continue. This isn't a thing we need to "solve," this reeks of a capitalist looking at graphs of our emissions and going "we could cut emissions by 1% here and not have to actually change our habits at all!" This isn't the problem causing climate change.

The energy sector accounts for over 70% of our emissions. Instead of trying to stop emitting less than 1% by pouring money into genetically manipulating plants to need less fertilizer, why don't we instead cut 30% or more by replacing coal plants with solar, wind, and nuclear power?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

If everyone went plant based we would need much much less farmland and thus need way less fertilizer.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We could just stop using it... no need for a technological fix.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

okay let's just kill the poorest people on the planet, good plan

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Or we just go for organic farming, since it's not using artifical fertilizer and actually keeps the soil alive, which in return has various positive effects on the enviroment. If we keep going like we did since the last decades there will be death for sure

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

4 billion people would die / wouldn’t be able to eat

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

That's absolutely not true. Chemical fertalizer just makes it so less hands need to grow food.

We absolutely do not need it. We've grown crops for tens of thousands of years without them.

Famines are social problems, not technical ones.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I like notill gardening. You don't need any chemical fertilizers. Grows great pot 🤌

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

High tech technology, aka humans, can also decide not to use it

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Don't tell the editor how much human poop is wasted

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Dora the explorer: can we fix it ? yes we can!