this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
295 points (98.4% liked)

Uplifting News

11416 readers
18 users here now

Welcome to /c/UpliftingNews, a dedicated space where optimism and positivity converge to bring you the most heartening and inspiring stories from around the world. We strive to curate and share content that lights up your day, invigorates your spirit, and inspires you to spread positivity in your own way. This is a sanctuary for those seeking a break from the incessant negativity often found in today's news cycle. From acts of everyday kindness to large-scale philanthropic efforts, from individual achievements to community triumphs, we bring you news that gives hope, fosters empathy, and strengthens the belief in humanity's capacity for good.

Here in /c/UpliftingNews, we uphold the values of respect, empathy, and inclusivity, fostering a supportive and vibrant community. We encourage you to share your positive news, comment, engage in uplifting conversations, and find solace in the goodness that exists around us. We are more than a news-sharing platform; we are a community built on the power of positivity and the collective desire for a more hopeful world. Remember, your small acts of kindness can be someone else's big ray of hope. Be part of the positivity revolution; share, uplift, inspire!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 63 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

contrary to climate change we actually took that one seriously.

we humans are very much able to solve all of our (human made) problems perfectly well, no matter how bad things are looking.

[–] ch00f 49 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Eh. The solution to the ozone layer was to replace refrigerant A with refrigerant B. A 1:1 swap that required very little effort from anybody.

Getting off fossil fuels more or less mandates an entire global paradigm shift in how we do basically everything. The entire global economy of the past 200 years has been built off an unsustainable energy source.

Sure, we can replace gas with batteries, but every step of the way is going to require small changes in how people do things, and they're going to be very resistant to that.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

the key was that the producers had to be forced to take action, as consumers had very little agency in choosing cfcs.

no ad campaign for individual responsibility there, as there was really nothing you could do.

[–] ch00f 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah but consumers already have choices when it comes to fossil fuels and they’re sticking with fossil fuels.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

my point is that the consumers are not where change starts. it's cheaper to run ad campaigns than it is to change the production process, but for CFCs they couldn't do that.

[–] ch00f 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Oh sure. I agree with that. Obviously many people have limited options.

I just think think it’s a monumentally bigger ask no matter where the change has to be made (policy or individual choice).

Like our best solution for transportation (in the US at least) is to just keep making larger free ways. Even gas powered buses running on decades old technology could make a significant impact on the climate crisis, but people either don’t want to ride them or cities don’t want to build them.

Any way, I’m just frustrated with the attitude that we’re going to technology our way out of this hole without needing to change or sacrifice anything (like we pulled off with ozone).

When it comes to energy use, there’s such a thing induced demand. If it’s cheaper, people will use it more. Hell, look at how much energy it takes to use AI to write an email.

There’s no induced demand with refrigerants.

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

right, we agree then. legislation is required.

[–] ch00f 1 points 1 month ago

Yeah, but again, try running on a platform of “everything you enjoy will need to be different.”

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

If refrigerant reacts with/eats away at the ozone layer, why is there such a big hole in the ozone layer above Antarctica?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Gases we emit into the atmosphere are well mixed over the whole globe in a relatively short time span over a few years or faster. So these refrigerants are in the same concentration over Antarctica as over inhabitated land. However, the ozone depletion effect of the gases is dependent on a lot of factors. One of them are stratospheric clouds, which seem to be one reason for the hole above Antarctica.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm somewhat pessimistic. Even if humans zeroed every single pollution, it won't be free on us, there's a bill to be paid, and Mother Nature will effectively charge us for this debt. And it'll not be cheap.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

humans are ingenious and adaptable. but we will have to get up from our collective asses to make any viable solution happen.

a fire is lit under us and i think its a matter of time, the sooner the better.

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

Yeah, yeah, I'm not condemning the action, the action IS needed. Like you said, the sooner the better. What I'm saying is that mankind accumulated environmental charges and felony, from decades of past and ongoing pollution, and these charges won't be dropped by Mother Nature as the cosmic living judgess: we'll still face serious consequences (we're already facing it, with increased temperatures around the globe, intense floods, and other climate disasters) even if we managed to zero pollutions today.

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

i think we have a long road ahead of us when it comes to figuring out how to undo most of that damage

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

meanwhile, the temperature

put it away, he's in a good mood.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Isn't that what they told us 20 years ago?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think 20 years ago they said it's set to heal by 2050...

[–] chuckleslord 13 points 1 month ago

Yes, but then China fucked us for a few years. They've since stopped, which is why the 16 year difference.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Plenty of time to rip her back open.

[–] Warjac 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Cool but with all the deniers we should probably stop posting achievements like this.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

nah they are the ones in the wrong

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

Only if it doesn't get ripped open by satellites burning up at high altitude again.