HomeWorldClimateAl Gore thought stopping climate change would be hard. But not this hard | Gore has been talking about carbon emissions for more than 40 years. Now he includes a “hope budget.”
Al Gore thought stopping climate change would be hard. But not this hard | Gore has been talking about carbon emissions for more than 40 years. Now he includes a “hope budget.”
October 7, 2024
Al Gore thought stopping climate change would be hard. But not this hard | Gore has been talking about carbon emissions for more than 40 years. Now he includes a “hope budget.”
They say printing more money causes inflation. But pumping out new oil is like printing more money.
You can’t talk about climate change effectively wearing a suit and tie.
His own words from his 2006 book made it clear why it would be difficult.
*As for why so many people still resist what the facts clearly show, I think, in part, the reason is that the truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means* ***we are going to have to change the way we live our lives.***
Even now, with extreme weather events increasing in frequency every year, the people in the wealthy countries are largely living the same kind of life they’ve always lived. And you see it in the comments even here in r/climate, where so many still say, “The system needs to change, but I don’t.” And climate scientists keep telling us the same thing — system change requires individual change.
*I often get questions that suggest people view this as a binary. “Do you think individual actions matter when systemic change is what we need?” But this is a false binary. It’s not one or the other. It’s both.*
*That approach is a little confounding, says David Ho, a climate scientist at the University of Hawaii, because* ***more stuff always has an impact.*** *“There is no such thing as a carbon-neutral product,” he says. “It’s kind of silly. It gives consumers the idea that there are ways out of these problems that don’t involve consuming less.”*
3 comments
They say printing more money causes inflation.
But pumping out new oil is like printing more money.
You can’t talk about climate change effectively wearing a suit and tie.
His own words from his 2006 book made it clear why it would be difficult.
*As for why so many people still resist what the facts clearly show, I think, in part, the reason is that the truth about the climate crisis is an inconvenient one that means* ***we are going to have to change the way we live our lives.***
Even now, with extreme weather events increasing in frequency every year, the people in the wealthy countries are largely living the same kind of life they’ve always lived. And you see it in the comments even here in r/climate, where so many still say, “The system needs to change, but I don’t.” And climate scientists keep telling us the same thing — system change requires individual change.
*I often get questions that suggest people view this as a binary. “Do you think individual actions matter when systemic change is what we need?” But this is a false binary. It’s not one or the other. It’s both.*
[https://substack.com/@hannahritchie/p-148713898](https://substack.com/@hannahritchie/p-148713898)
*That approach is a little confounding, says David Ho, a climate scientist at the University of Hawaii, because* ***more stuff always has an impact.*** *“There is no such thing as a carbon-neutral product,” he says. “It’s kind of silly. It gives consumers the idea that there are ways out of these problems that don’t involve consuming less.”*
[https://www.wired.com/story/new-apple-watch-series-9-wont-be-carbon-neutral/](https://www.wired.com/story/new-apple-watch-series-9-wont-be-carbon-neutral/)