Scientific American (Opinion): The World Solved Acid Rain. We Can Also Solve Climate Change

[OKIsItJustMe]

The World Solved Acid Rain. We Can Also Solve Climate Change

Lessons from how we tackled acid rain can be applied to our world today

By Hannah Ritchie on October 25, 2023

The world feels like it’s being set alight; wildfires in Canada and Europe, floods in China, and a never-ending stream of recording-breaking heat waves have garnered numerous headlines.

The feeling that time is quickly running out is very real. And it’s easy to believe that the world cannot tackle big environmental problems. This sense of helplessness is something that I have personally battled for more than a decade. But that feeling is a barrier to action: Nothing has changed when we’ve called for action before, so why should we expect any different this time?

But our past efforts tell us there is hope. The world has solved large environmental problems that seemed unsurmountable at the time. In my role at Our World in Data, I’ve spent years looking at how these problems have evolved, and I think that it’s worth studying these issues, not only for hope, but to understand what went right and what can help us face today’s crises. An eye-opening example is acid rain; studying how the world tackled this geopolitically divisive problem can give us some insights into how we can tackle climate change today.

It has mostly slipped from the public conversation, but acid rain was the leading environmental problem of the 1990s. At one point, it was one of the biggest bilateral diplomatic issues between the United States and Canada.

…

[redqueen]

1. I'd like to see this in GD as well

[Voltaire2]

2. Capitalism is incompatible with a sustainable economy.

So while theoretically we could ‘solve’ climate change, instead the system we have will continue to reproduce itself, and in doing so will continue to shred both the global environment and the consciousness of the humans within the dominant culture of the system.

[Irish_Dem]

3. Humans can solve most of the problems they are facing. But they don't want to.

And no one can make them it appears.

[Midnight Writer]

4. Exactly. We CAN do it, by coming together, by working together, making changes, making sacrifices.

What are the odds of that happening?

[Irish_Dem]

5. The world oligarchs and autocrats don't want to solve the problem.

They are making too much money damaging the world.
And the autocratic leaders see world chaos as a great way to grab power.

[orthoclad]

14. The people who need to make the sacrifices

are the ones with the wealth and power. They use a vastly disproportionate share of the world's resources, and they maintain the growth pyramid that secures their place.

All us Westerners can do with a healthy dose of "Use it up, wear it out, make it do or do without" (which is truly a "conservative" saying), but there's a big difference between patching clothes and owning a superyacht. Or a space-tourism rocket. Superyachts use entire countries' worth of carbon.

What are the odds of Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerthing making non-symbolic sacrifices?

[orthoclad]

10. Humans want to. The rich don't.

[Irish_Dem]

11. But humans keep supporting the bad guys.

And in many cases adore them.

[orthoclad]

12. That's because the rich own

the organs of propaganda. Think smoking and the Marlboro Man. These days, substitute SUV ads for the man on the horse.

In the West, tv (and now online media) is used as a babysitter. From birth, the children of rich Western countries are exposed to non-stop propaganda, in the form of advertising and also in the themes and images of the content. To a child, there's little competition between gentle messaging and explosions-blood-fire-SUVs with stirring music. Drama wins.

When we say "humans", are we talking about US coal-rollers or Bangladeshi fishermen?

[Irish_Dem]

13. I am talking human species.

Yes propaganda is the norm from most leaders for the history of the human race.

[orthoclad]

15. But most of the species

contributes very little to the problem. Most humans live a subsistence life, with famine on the horizon.

[Irish_Dem]

16. Most of the species allows sociopaths to come to power.

The power which starves them.

There are enough resources on this planet to feed all the humans on it.
But humans allow most of the resources to be owned by the wealthy and powerful.
We don't even question it.

[orthoclad]

17. I don't think humans "allow" power

to the sociopaths who control the guns, the churches, the jobs, the media, and the infrastructure. Humans mainly spend their time and energy surviving and taking care of their children. Power is mostly taken or seized, not allowed. Look at the robber barons and the often lethal union struggles. Exceptions tend to be quickly stamped down.

We have enough resources globally for all humans to eat, be healthy, and be educated - modestly. Those with wealth and power don't allow this. So far.

[eppur_se_muova]

6. Don't forget ozone depletion. nt

[BootinUp]

7. Another one that was eliminated

By global action Yes.

[Vogon_Glory]

8. I think we might be able to deal with it, BUT

we are going to suffer a lot of nasty effects caused by greed, procrastination, and denialism. I don’t think we humans can reverse some of the warming trends we’ve already set in motion: the best we and our descendants can hope for is to arrest further deterioration. If we can arrest further deterioration, things will still be worse than they are now when that is accomplished: a lot of the warming processes are beyond our control.

I am not a climate doomster. I do not predict a collapse of civilization or the extinction of the human species. Humanity has already survived the effects of massive climate change before during and after the Pleistocene. I do think things are going to get a lot grimmer than they are now and that it won’t be pretty. I think, however, we owe it to ourselves to fight to save as much as we can and try not only to conserve, but restore when and where we can. It won’t be cheap or easy and we’ve lost three decades we could have used to make this planet a far more pleasant place for our posterity.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. I just finished reading Novacene by James Lovelock "originator of the Gaia theory"

(It was his last book.)

He believed that extinction of humanity was a distinct possibility, but, rather doubted it would occur due to “Climate Change” directly.

[2naSalit]

18. I don 't remember when...

It was that we "solved" acid rain.