Bruh how? You can get kilograms of dried beans for $10.
It's more expensive for canned beans but for $10 are you eating 5 cans of organic beans a day?
There's no way I'd use a grocery app. Paper and pen works well enough.
Now, if my phone had a slide-out physical keyboard like it did back in fucking 2007, I'd consider it. As it is, typing on phones is pain.
The area this article is talking about was oak savannah:
Within these oak savannas, which were interlaced with prairies, tree crowns covered between 10 percent and 30 percent of the ground. They were essentially a transition between the tight deciduous forests of the East and the fully open grasslands further west.
By practicing agroforestry — growing trees alongside crops and livestock, for example — farmers can improve soils, produce nutrient-rich foods, and build resilience to climate change. Now, a movement is emerging to bring this approach to the depleted lands of the Corn Belt.
Odd to see Papua New Guinea referred to as an "Island Nation" as if it were like a microstate in the Pacific. It's half of New Guinea and bunch of other islands besides, and it's bigger than Sweden.
Can we also bulldoze the Nazi SS cemetery in Oakville and for good measure, flood it with piss?
Apparently the monument is gone "for repairs".
Most climate scientists say we need to make changes to our personal lives and changes to the system. If one lives in the overdeveloped world, one's impact is potentially huge. There are basic things that make a difference: eat less meat from ruminants (beef, mutton), don't fly, have fewer or no kids. Those are low hanging fruit, take little effort, and still leave time and energy for whatever system change tactic one wants to do.
I've encountered the term "Imperial mode of living" cited by Kohei Salto. Thanks for posting this interview.
On the theft of resources for the affluent lifestyle, I recommend Cobalt Red, about mining in the DRC. It's a brutal read. Kids digging with hand tools in toxic pits for $1 a day.
The commute itself? Hard to say. But according to the article, a billionaire produces emissions equivalent to a million average people.
There are 3,311 billionaires.
Once they are eliminated, that's the emissions of 3.3 billion people taken care of.
Site C floodwaters will consume thousands of hectares of land along the Peace River in B.C. to create a reservoir almost five times the size of Victoria
Another huge hydro dam is being built in British Columbia, on Canada's west coast.
The article describes the coming destruction of farmland and wildlife habitat.
“We have to decarbonize our economy, but it can’t be on the back of flooding more river valleys.”
But as long as the economy grows, more sacrifice zones like this will be made. And if you don't like flooded river valleys, go take a look at tar sands pits or mountaintop removals.
I = PAT
Impact is equal to population times affluence times technology.
Decreasing human population can help to decrease impact, as long as the smaller population doesn't disproportionately increase its resource use (affluence x technology)
"Each side" is the issue - this party is going to let the conversation be driven by existing parties rather than any objective thinking. It's leaving the conversation to be defined by the hegemonic political machines. So I expect nothing new. Another party of business as usual.
Sure, Canada's doing great but we're driving off a cliff in many respects. Once the ground gives out we're gonna have a bad time.
Forestry companies get deep discounts and other perks when they harvest in areas burned by B.C. wildfires. But salvage logging also targets living trees that could play a key role in species and ecosystem recovery
Logging companies get to clearcut burned forests, including trees that survived the burn. Another way that capital can profit even from disaster. And the extractive state lays down the red carpet for capital to do it.
What Canada needs: yet another party jostling to get to the center as quickly as possible. Another party whose platform is the Overton Window. The most average party possible.
Yep it looks like the report only takes into account emissions from consumption, not from wildfires etc.
Tracking G7 climate progress with data from 116,095 power plants - Carbon Brief
This article introduces the GIPT and illustrates the sorts of insights it can generate, using the example of the G7’s pledges.
Specifically about coal plants.