Hacker News Reader

Comment by blueflow | Hacker News Reader

Feel bad about climate change? Do this symbolic nonsense to feel better about yourself!

This would be a more useful comment if you actually engaged with the article to point out which parts you don't agree with and suggest alternatives. For example I'm very skeptical that reducing the power consumption of software is very effective; although the industry has made huge advances in low-power hardware, induced demand has meant that the overall electricity consumption of the sector has continued to increase. A lot of "sustainable" tech initatives seem to be based around that and demand shifting so you're running compute jobs at times when renewables are more widely available. The latter might be worth worthwhile as a short-term hack, but it's only a meaningful part of a solution insofar as it incentivises a faster transition to more clean/renewable energy.

When you just make a blanket statement that everything is "symbolic nonsense" it's easy to assume that you're not interested in helping, but just one of the many people who has pivoted directly from "climate change isn't real so we should ignore it" to "climate change is inevitable and so we should ignore it".

I've never been in a plane. I don't go on vacation. I don't have a drivers license. I don't feel bad, because i rarely do things i should feel bad for.

I see that people like the articles author do feel bad about it, and do some metrics like that to feel less bad about it. None of the things the author did does reduce emissions. If i wanted to reduce emissions, i'd probably not even have the tech to show me the emissions charts.

I think this is come kind of coping mechanism. Okay if you need it, but i won't pretend its more than that.

>I've never been in a plane. I don't go on vacation. I don't have a drivers license. I don't feel bad, because i rarely do things i should feel bad for.

Sounds like "symbolic nonsense to feel better about yourself". By reducing your personal carbon emissions a North American can probably go from 22 tonnes of C02e/year to maybe 5 tonnes CO2e/year. Maybe a little less if you really try. So you can cut maybe 17 tonnes / year * 80 years = 1360 tonnes over a lifetime. That's about the CO2 emissions of a plane doing 2 return trips across the Atlantic. If you're from Europe your baseline emissions are probably lower (by almost a factor of 2 between the USA and Western Europe) and therefore so are the potential savings.

Although cutting one's personal carbon footprint is a good first step, individual lifestyle changes aren't enough to make a difference. They're OK, but not more than that. Technical, cultural and political solutions are all required, and although there might be parts of the original article that are misguided at least it's trying to engage with the problem at more than an individual level.

It's always fascinating to see how many negative emotions are triggered when you advocate openness in terms of climate change. It seems to me that you are also very concerned about this topic.

I'm concerned about how many people lie to themselves to feel better, and then expect me to support their delusions.

I can absolutely understand you. A lot of what is done in this area is unfortunately greenwashing and is meant to make you feel good. That's why open source is so important for "impact" measurements. Conclusions based on open satellite data and open source processing pipelines are very difficult to "greenwash". Let numbers based on empirical measurements and open models decide what is actually sustainable for the climate, rather than opaque marketing.

Nothing you mention actually does the action of reducing carbon emissions.

Every action you take first creates emissions. Doing nothing often seems to be the safest way to reduce your own emissions. This gives you a good feeling that you are at least not part of the problem. An open source / open science strategy at least prevents greenwashing and allows to at least focus on measures that actually save emissions. However, as long as the systemic / economic problem behind climate change is not solved, someone else will simply create the emissions for you.

Find more about this under the term "Climate Shadow": https://www.mic.com/impact/forget-your-carbon-footprint-lets....

It's not completely symbolic either, little things can help too, and open source (and most importantly) open data, brings transparency which indeed allow for people to work together and build a counter power.

But then again, if you really want to do something about at your own level, just travel less (be it for work or leisure), watch less netflix and don't upgrade your machines, just replace them when they don't work anymore. That'd be start.

I hate to say it 'cos I hate those punchlines, but this time, "less is more" :-)

Afterwards, fly somewhere for recreation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com