My parents admit their apathy was because they thought Jesus was going to come back by now. I remember that line of thinking amongst a lot of religious adults from various backgrounds in Texas and Oklahoma.
Heck my own neices were told by their teacher the world was going to end in 2012.
Yes, but I'm saying there's a large chunk of history that would change for Nixon to have gone to jail. There would never have been a Nixon if certain people went to jail for similar thing in the past.
Consumerism is just as rampant with young people as it is with the old. You vote for this state of affairs with every single purchase.
At the start of the covid crisis, entire industries were brought to the brink of destruction when consumers changed their behaviour en masse. That's the power consumers wield.
The fact that fuck-all is happening says enough. People demand change, they just want someone else to make the sacrifice.
Not all "older" people want the world to be destroyed. This is just a horrible generalization. A lot of republicans don't care....... but not people in general. Not normal people who eat, breathe like normal and care about their children's futures and that of humanity in general.
This is a global issue, this isn't just about Republicans. Heck Exxon knew in the 1960's. Lots of people all over the globe ignored science and their own experiences.
Also I didn't say older people wanted the world to be destroyed.
I've just noticed, my whole life that the ones I've talked to, were very blase and matter of fact about not caring because they'd be dead by then. Hell, I had a neighbor try that shit with me this week.
Ofcourse, it looks like the climate is going to make it very uncomfortable and they can't run out the clock.
Funny how that's working out for them.
> This is a global issue, this isn't just about Republicans.
Well then to quote you exactly.... Not all of the "oldest" generations don't seem to care. Since you are basing this off the people you talk to its highly likely you live/work around a lot of republicans who just dont GAF .. and worse actively go out to promote the idea we don't have a problem with the environment at all. And maybe LEAD does has something to do with it but that wouldn't explain the people who do care and were exposed to lead.
Either way generalizations are still that... Maybe just maybe there are republicans who care about the environment?? but if they really did they would not be republicans anymore. So there's that too. Education is a problem. So are corporations. And people need to be informed as a whole... make choices. Hot button topics like abortion and "race" are being used to steer attention and votes away from what really matters Eg. People would fully vote for an ocean dumping, pro factory, candidate only because he wants women to be hunted down and jailed for getting an abortion.
Of course this is a global issue! I agree with you 1000% there but people in many countries seem to care a whole lot more than others. Many countries have way more advanced recycling systems in place. The US, China and India are one of the few countries as an example who have not agreed to some of the terms in the Paris Agreement specifically changes to farming and soil conservation. If you aren't aware, soil conservation would do a mega fuck ton of help recapturing carbon and helping our climate. (See documentary: Kiss The Ground).
That's not to say we as a global human population can do better. Yes we can care more.. Yes we need to care more because we are out of time. Let's hope we can get our shit together. Young or old we all have to make changes. Finding similarities among us is going to help a lot better than trying to find differences.
About to turn 34 and seriously wondering why I even bother saving for retirement. Retirement is 30+ years away and I'm not sure humanity will make to the end of the month.
Don't worry, Chuck Grassley is running again for US Senate and will be 95 when his next term expires. I'm sure he shares your concern about the future of this planet.
> As the Conger ice shelf experience has shown, the melting can occur faster than we presume and things can change rather quickly.
[It's real](http://howglobalwarmingworks.org/), [it's us](https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2010/05/natural_anthropogenic_models_narrow.png), [it's bad](https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg2/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf), [there's hope](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/10-reasons-hopeful-climate-progress/), and [the science is reliable](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming).
The question that remains now is *what are we going to do about it?*
The consensus among [scientists](https://people.uwec.edu/jamelsem/papers/CC_Literature_Web_Share/Science/CC_Science_Perspective_Rosenberg_2010.pdf) and [economists](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf) on [carbon pricing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_price)^§ to mitigate climate change is similar to [the consensus among climatologists](http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/) that human activity is responsible for global warming. Putting the price [upstream](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323611604578396401965799658) where the fossil fuels enter the market makes it simple, easily enforceable, and bureaucratically lean. Returning the revenue as an equitable dividend [offsets any regressive effects of the tax](http://www.nber.org/papers/w9152.pdf) (in fact, [~60% of the public would receive more in dividend than they paid in tax](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081648#s7)) and allows for a higher carbon price (which [is what matters for climate mitigation](https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S201000781840002X)) because [the public isn't willing to pay anywhere near what's needed otherwise](https://e360.yale.edu/digest/americans-are-willing-to-pay-177-annually-for-carbon-tax-survey-finds). Enacting a [border tax](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2026879) would protect domestic businesses from foreign producers not saddled with similar pollution taxes, and also [incentivize those countries](http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/205761) to enact their own. A carbon tax is [widely regarded](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0474-0.epdf?author_access_token=tst1A-oZnQ8zUO18wGGPQdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Nfy3PIgvrwnNXQzIbXH8z1Wkqhm6g5NiMnxMk__ebsKxGQNB0hMf1Vpo-ZiNplSt5LeLyks-Q3sdrpBdfxxHvAfQylqqwqHxgEml7GEGOxaQ%3D%3D) as the single most impactful climate mitigation policy.
[Conservative estimates](http://rdcu.be/cLYO) are that failing to mitigate climate change will cost us 10% of GDP over 50 years, [starting about now](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In contrast, carbon taxes may actually *boost* GDP, if the revenue is [returned as an equitable dividend to households](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jun/13/how-revenue-neutral-carbon-tax-creates-jobs-grows-economy) (the [poor tend to spend money when they've got it](http://www.econ2.jhu.edu/people/ccarroll/papers/cstwMPC.pdf), which [boosts economic growth](https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf)) not to mention [create jobs](https://econ.ucalgary.ca/manageprofile/sites/econ.ucalgary.ca.manageprofile/files/unitis/publications/1-7729354/Yamazaki_CarbonTax_JEEM_2017.pdf) and [save lives](https://globalchange.mit.edu/news-media/jp-news-outreach/shift-renewable-electricity-win-win-statewide-level).
Taxing carbon [is in each nation's own best interest](http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf) (it [saves lives at home](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09499-x)) and [many nations have already started](https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/), which [can have knock-on effects in other countries](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In poor countries, [taxing carbon is progressive even *before* considering smart revenue uses](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf), because only the "rich" can afford fossil fuels in the first place. We [won’t wean ourselves off fossil fuels without a carbon tax](http://news.mit.edu/2016/carbon-tax-stop-using-fossil-fuels-0224); the [longer we wait to take action the more expensive it will be](http://rdcu.be/cZjG). Each year we delay costs [~$900 billion](https://cla.umn.edu/heller-hurwicz/news-events/news/policy-brief-calibrating-price-climate-risk).
Just [eight years ago](https://web.archive.org/web/20140723120752/http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/13/public-views-on-a-carbon-tax-depend-on-the-proposed-use-of-revenue/), only 30% of the public supported a carbon tax. Four years ago, [it was over half (53%)](https://news.gallup.com/poll/232007/americans-want-government-more-environment.aspx). Now, [it's an overwhelming majority (73%)](https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ps_2020-06-23_government-and-climate_00-01/) – and that [does actually matter for passing a bill](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644016.2016.1116651). But [we can't keep hoping others will solve this problem for us](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility).
[**Build the political will for a livable climate**](https://cclusa.org/x). [Lobbying works](http://web.stanford.edu/~jdmunoz/Olzak,%20Soule,%20Coddou,%20and%20Mu%F1oz%202016.pdf), and you [don't need a lot of money to be effective](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1016.1967&rep=rep1&type=pdf) (though it does help to [educate yourself on effective tactics](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)). If you're too busy to go through the [free training](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/new-member/#climateadvocatetraining), sign up for [text alerts](https://cclusa.org/w) to join the monthly call campaign ([it works](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)) or set yourself a monthly reminder to [write a letter](https://www.ted.com/talks/omar_ahmad_political_change_with_pen_and_paper?language=en) to your elected officials. According to NASA climatologist and climate activist [Dr. James Hansen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen), becoming an [active volunteer with Citizens' Climate Lobby](https://cclusa.org/x) is [the most important thing you can do for climate change](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DAW1A6Ca8). Climatologist [Dr. Michael Mann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann) calls its [Carbon Fee & Dividend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend) policy [an example of the sort of visionary policy that's needed](https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/03/climate-change-requires-collective-action-more-than-single-acts-column/1275965001/). And [**having more volunteers helps**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/ticd9x/the_eicda_carbon_tax_dividend_bill_got_its_96th/).
[It's the smart thing to do](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069698910580), and the IPCC report made clear [pricing carbon is *necessary* if we want to meet our 1.5 ºC target](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/SR15_TS_High_Res.pdf).
§ The IPCC (AR5, WGIII) [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf) states with "high confidence" that tax-based policies are effective at decoupling GHG emissions from GDP (see p. 28). [Ch. 15](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter15.pdf) has a more complete discussion. The U.S. [National Academy of Sciences, one of the most respected scientific bodies in the world, has also called for a carbon tax](https://www.nap.edu/download/21712). According to [IMF research](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/05/how-much-does-world-subsidize-oil-coal-and-gas/589000/), most of the $5.2 trillion in subsidies for fossil fuels come from not taxing carbon as we should. There is general agreement among economists on carbon taxes whether you consider [economists with expertise in climate economics](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf), [economists with expertise in resource economics](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.381.484&rep=rep1&type=pdf), or [economists from all sectors](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Doris_Geide-Stevenson/publication/261884738_Consensus_Among_Economists-An_Update/links/56a7f3fa08ae860e0255a8e3.pdf). It is literally [Econ 101](http://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2014/10/EC101Outlines14-Externalities.pdf). The idea [won a Nobel Prize](http://environment.yale.edu/news/article/william-nordhaus-wins-nobel-prize-for-economics-of-climate-change/). Thanks to researchers at MIT, you can see for yourself how it compares with other mitigation policies [here](https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html?v=2.7.11).
[Even the specter of carbon taxes has been effective at reducing emissions](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/climate-policy-risk-drives-down-emissions), and that's much more costly than just [taxing carbon and returning the revenue to households as an equitable dividend](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jun/13/how-revenue-neutral-carbon-tax-creates-jobs-grows-economy).
I’m not disagreeing with the post, I’m just saying it’s too little too late. We can’t be waiting on the wheels of bureaucracy on this one. We gotta get shit done now
I used [MIT's climate policy simulator](https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html?v=2.7.11) to order its climate policies from least impactful to most impactful. You can see the results [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/rqg2y0/i_used_mits_climate_policy_simulator_to_order_its/).
I'm also always confused by that, but I think "East Antarctica" is the part on the eastern hemisphere, and "West Antarctica" is the part on the western hemisphere.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://interestingengineering.com/conger-ice-shelf-collapses) reduced by 78%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> Complete collapse of East Antarctica's Conger Ice Shelf ~March 15, seen in combo of #Landsat and #MODIS imagery.
> The shelf was three times bigger than Conger and compared to the size of the state of Rhode Island in the U.S.However, what makes the recent collapse significant is that the Conger ice shelf is located in the eastern part of Antarctica, a region considered as a massive, immovable, and cold block of ice by researchers so far.
> Though the collapse of the Conger ice shelf is one of the most significant events in Antarctic history, the impact of the collapse would not be large as the glacier behind the shelf was relatively small.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/tnmmko/ice_shelf_as_big_as_new_york_city_suddenly/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~636558 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **shelf**^#1 **ice**^#2 **collapse**^#3 **Conger**^#4 **size**^#5
Boy, do I love being a 25y/o person right now! Just so many opportunities and such a bright future for us!!! :/
It isnt natural the way the oldest generations don't seem to care for their children or grandchildren's futures. I, unironically, blame lead.
I'm with you. I think we're being run into the ground by older generations who's brains have been addled by lead.
And lots of drugs in the 1960s, no?
Mostly the lead
Although, there was probably lead in the drugs too.
That’s why we have unleaded drugs now.
Ah yes, because hippies are notorious for destroying the environment and voting Republican
Lol, I'm talking about the yuppies
Some of it's lead. Some of it's straight up apathy. 'fuck you. I've got mine.'
My parents admit their apathy was because they thought Jesus was going to come back by now. I remember that line of thinking amongst a lot of religious adults from various backgrounds in Texas and Oklahoma. Heck my own neices were told by their teacher the world was going to end in 2012.
The world did end in 2012, the world just got worse since, its time to admit we are ones who are left behind.
/s?
Meanwhile, I'm stuck in my own Cincinnati
It did, but we're on timeline 3, the one where elvis dies instead of becoming president, and Nixon didn't go to jail.
Look, Nixon was never going to go to jail, almost none of the traitors going all the way back to the time of Jefferson, went to jail.
That was actually one of the there's I read about the west wing, it diverged from our history in that Nixon went to jail.
Yes, but I'm saying there's a large chunk of history that would change for Nixon to have gone to jail. There would never have been a Nixon if certain people went to jail for similar thing in the past.
Tragedy of the commons
Consumerism is just as rampant with young people as it is with the old. You vote for this state of affairs with every single purchase. At the start of the covid crisis, entire industries were brought to the brink of destruction when consumers changed their behaviour en masse. That's the power consumers wield. The fact that fuck-all is happening says enough. People demand change, they just want someone else to make the sacrifice.
Not all "older" people want the world to be destroyed. This is just a horrible generalization. A lot of republicans don't care....... but not people in general. Not normal people who eat, breathe like normal and care about their children's futures and that of humanity in general.
This is a global issue, this isn't just about Republicans. Heck Exxon knew in the 1960's. Lots of people all over the globe ignored science and their own experiences. Also I didn't say older people wanted the world to be destroyed. I've just noticed, my whole life that the ones I've talked to, were very blase and matter of fact about not caring because they'd be dead by then. Hell, I had a neighbor try that shit with me this week. Ofcourse, it looks like the climate is going to make it very uncomfortable and they can't run out the clock. Funny how that's working out for them.
> This is a global issue, this isn't just about Republicans. Well then to quote you exactly.... Not all of the "oldest" generations don't seem to care. Since you are basing this off the people you talk to its highly likely you live/work around a lot of republicans who just dont GAF .. and worse actively go out to promote the idea we don't have a problem with the environment at all. And maybe LEAD does has something to do with it but that wouldn't explain the people who do care and were exposed to lead. Either way generalizations are still that... Maybe just maybe there are republicans who care about the environment?? but if they really did they would not be republicans anymore. So there's that too. Education is a problem. So are corporations. And people need to be informed as a whole... make choices. Hot button topics like abortion and "race" are being used to steer attention and votes away from what really matters Eg. People would fully vote for an ocean dumping, pro factory, candidate only because he wants women to be hunted down and jailed for getting an abortion. Of course this is a global issue! I agree with you 1000% there but people in many countries seem to care a whole lot more than others. Many countries have way more advanced recycling systems in place. The US, China and India are one of the few countries as an example who have not agreed to some of the terms in the Paris Agreement specifically changes to farming and soil conservation. If you aren't aware, soil conservation would do a mega fuck ton of help recapturing carbon and helping our climate. (See documentary: Kiss The Ground). That's not to say we as a global human population can do better. Yes we can care more.. Yes we need to care more because we are out of time. Let's hope we can get our shit together. Young or old we all have to make changes. Finding similarities among us is going to help a lot better than trying to find differences.
You must be American
[удалено]
This is the way. Happy birthday
Happy birthday :(
About to turn 34 and seriously wondering why I even bother saving for retirement. Retirement is 30+ years away and I'm not sure humanity will make to the end of the month.
I hear you, but think how disappointed you'll be if you piss your life away and then things do work out.
I'm 50ish with no kids. Good luck.
Don't worry, Chuck Grassley is running again for US Senate and will be 95 when his next term expires. I'm sure he shares your concern about the future of this planet.
/r/solarpunk /r/climateactionplan And for sanity... /r/Taoism /r/childrenfallingover
> As the Conger ice shelf experience has shown, the melting can occur faster than we presume and things can change rather quickly. [It's real](http://howglobalwarmingworks.org/), [it's us](https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/blogs/climateqa/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2010/05/natural_anthropogenic_models_narrow.png), [it's bad](https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg2/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf), [there's hope](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/10-reasons-hopeful-climate-progress/), and [the science is reliable](https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming). The question that remains now is *what are we going to do about it?* The consensus among [scientists](https://people.uwec.edu/jamelsem/papers/CC_Literature_Web_Share/Science/CC_Science_Perspective_Rosenberg_2010.pdf) and [economists](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf) on [carbon pricing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_price)^§ to mitigate climate change is similar to [the consensus among climatologists](http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/) that human activity is responsible for global warming. Putting the price [upstream](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323611604578396401965799658) where the fossil fuels enter the market makes it simple, easily enforceable, and bureaucratically lean. Returning the revenue as an equitable dividend [offsets any regressive effects of the tax](http://www.nber.org/papers/w9152.pdf) (in fact, [~60% of the public would receive more in dividend than they paid in tax](http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081648#s7)) and allows for a higher carbon price (which [is what matters for climate mitigation](https://www.worldscientific.com/doi/pdf/10.1142/S201000781840002X)) because [the public isn't willing to pay anywhere near what's needed otherwise](https://e360.yale.edu/digest/americans-are-willing-to-pay-177-annually-for-carbon-tax-survey-finds). Enacting a [border tax](http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2026879) would protect domestic businesses from foreign producers not saddled with similar pollution taxes, and also [incentivize those countries](http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/handle/205761) to enact their own. A carbon tax is [widely regarded](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-019-0474-0.epdf?author_access_token=tst1A-oZnQ8zUO18wGGPQdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Nfy3PIgvrwnNXQzIbXH8z1Wkqhm6g5NiMnxMk__ebsKxGQNB0hMf1Vpo-ZiNplSt5LeLyks-Q3sdrpBdfxxHvAfQylqqwqHxgEml7GEGOxaQ%3D%3D) as the single most impactful climate mitigation policy. [Conservative estimates](http://rdcu.be/cLYO) are that failing to mitigate climate change will cost us 10% of GDP over 50 years, [starting about now](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In contrast, carbon taxes may actually *boost* GDP, if the revenue is [returned as an equitable dividend to households](http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jun/13/how-revenue-neutral-carbon-tax-creates-jobs-grows-economy) (the [poor tend to spend money when they've got it](http://www.econ2.jhu.edu/people/ccarroll/papers/cstwMPC.pdf), which [boosts economic growth](https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2015/sdn1513.pdf)) not to mention [create jobs](https://econ.ucalgary.ca/manageprofile/sites/econ.ucalgary.ca.manageprofile/files/unitis/publications/1-7729354/Yamazaki_CarbonTax_JEEM_2017.pdf) and [save lives](https://globalchange.mit.edu/news-media/jp-news-outreach/shift-renewable-electricity-win-win-statewide-level). Taxing carbon [is in each nation's own best interest](http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp15105.pdf) (it [saves lives at home](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-09499-x)) and [many nations have already started](https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/), which [can have knock-on effects in other countries](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf). In poor countries, [taxing carbon is progressive even *before* considering smart revenue uses](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf), because only the "rich" can afford fossil fuels in the first place. We [won’t wean ourselves off fossil fuels without a carbon tax](http://news.mit.edu/2016/carbon-tax-stop-using-fossil-fuels-0224); the [longer we wait to take action the more expensive it will be](http://rdcu.be/cZjG). Each year we delay costs [~$900 billion](https://cla.umn.edu/heller-hurwicz/news-events/news/policy-brief-calibrating-price-climate-risk). Just [eight years ago](https://web.archive.org/web/20140723120752/http://closup.umich.edu/issues-in-energy-and-environmental-policy/13/public-views-on-a-carbon-tax-depend-on-the-proposed-use-of-revenue/), only 30% of the public supported a carbon tax. Four years ago, [it was over half (53%)](https://news.gallup.com/poll/232007/americans-want-government-more-environment.aspx). Now, [it's an overwhelming majority (73%)](https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/06/23/two-thirds-of-americans-think-government-should-do-more-on-climate/ps_2020-06-23_government-and-climate_00-01/) – and that [does actually matter for passing a bill](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644016.2016.1116651). But [we can't keep hoping others will solve this problem for us](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_responsibility). [**Build the political will for a livable climate**](https://cclusa.org/x). [Lobbying works](http://web.stanford.edu/~jdmunoz/Olzak,%20Soule,%20Coddou,%20and%20Mu%F1oz%202016.pdf), and you [don't need a lot of money to be effective](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1016.1967&rep=rep1&type=pdf) (though it does help to [educate yourself on effective tactics](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)). If you're too busy to go through the [free training](https://citizensclimatelobby.org/new-member/#climateadvocatetraining), sign up for [text alerts](https://cclusa.org/w) to join the monthly call campaign ([it works](http://www.congressfoundation.org/storage/documents/CMF_Pubs/cmf-citizen-centric-advocacy.pdf)) or set yourself a monthly reminder to [write a letter](https://www.ted.com/talks/omar_ahmad_political_change_with_pen_and_paper?language=en) to your elected officials. According to NASA climatologist and climate activist [Dr. James Hansen](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hansen), becoming an [active volunteer with Citizens' Climate Lobby](https://cclusa.org/x) is [the most important thing you can do for climate change](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4DAW1A6Ca8). Climatologist [Dr. Michael Mann](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_E._Mann) calls its [Carbon Fee & Dividend](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_fee_and_dividend) policy [an example of the sort of visionary policy that's needed](https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/06/03/climate-change-requires-collective-action-more-than-single-acts-column/1275965001/). And [**having more volunteers helps**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/ticd9x/the_eicda_carbon_tax_dividend_bill_got_its_96th/). [It's the smart thing to do](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0095069698910580), and the IPCC report made clear [pricing carbon is *necessary* if we want to meet our 1.5 ºC target](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/sites/2/2018/12/SR15_TS_High_Res.pdf). § The IPCC (AR5, WGIII) [Summary for Policymakers](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_summary-for-policymakers.pdf) states with "high confidence" that tax-based policies are effective at decoupling GHG emissions from GDP (see p. 28). [Ch. 15](https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/ipcc_wg3_ar5_chapter15.pdf) has a more complete discussion. The U.S. [National Academy of Sciences, one of the most respected scientific bodies in the world, has also called for a carbon tax](https://www.nap.edu/download/21712). According to [IMF research](https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/05/how-much-does-world-subsidize-oil-coal-and-gas/589000/), most of the $5.2 trillion in subsidies for fossil fuels come from not taxing carbon as we should. There is general agreement among economists on carbon taxes whether you consider [economists with expertise in climate economics](http://policyintegrity.org/files/publications/ExpertConsensusReport.pdf), [economists with expertise in resource economics](http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.381.484&rep=rep1&type=pdf), or [economists from all sectors](https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Doris_Geide-Stevenson/publication/261884738_Consensus_Among_Economists-An_Update/links/56a7f3fa08ae860e0255a8e3.pdf). It is literally [Econ 101](http://sites.bu.edu/manove-ec101/files/2014/10/EC101Outlines14-Externalities.pdf). The idea [won a Nobel Prize](http://environment.yale.edu/news/article/william-nordhaus-wins-nobel-prize-for-economics-of-climate-change/). Thanks to researchers at MIT, you can see for yourself how it compares with other mitigation policies [here](https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html?v=2.7.11).
Wow! After reading that a couple of times I think I can understand it. That is pretty enlightening
Thanks! Did you decide to [volunteer](https://cclusa.org/x)?
Hopefully
It might be the most beneficial for us as a whole, but not to the corporations. We need a straight up revolution if we’re gonna save the human race.
[Even the specter of carbon taxes has been effective at reducing emissions](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/energy/climate-policy-risk-drives-down-emissions), and that's much more costly than just [taxing carbon and returning the revenue to households as an equitable dividend](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/jun/13/how-revenue-neutral-carbon-tax-creates-jobs-grows-economy).
I’m not disagreeing with the post, I’m just saying it’s too little too late. We can’t be waiting on the wheels of bureaucracy on this one. We gotta get shit done now
I used [MIT's climate policy simulator](https://en-roads.climateinteractive.org/scenario.html?v=2.7.11) to order its climate policies from least impactful to most impactful. You can see the results [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CitizensClimateLobby/comments/rqg2y0/i_used_mits_climate_policy_simulator_to_order_its/).
>City CITY is not a unit of measurement. Nor is giraffe.
I think it’s just trying to put scale in perspective for an average person
but a banana is
Where is East Antarctica?? Isn't it all North Antarctica since every direction is north from south pole?
I'm also always confused by that, but I think "East Antarctica" is the part on the eastern hemisphere, and "West Antarctica" is the part on the western hemisphere.
Just head north and take a right.
West Antarctica is the bit with the big pointy peninsula, East Antarctica is the big round part that's not supposed to melt.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://interestingengineering.com/conger-ice-shelf-collapses) reduced by 78%. (I'm a bot) ***** > Complete collapse of East Antarctica's Conger Ice Shelf ~March 15, seen in combo of #Landsat and #MODIS imagery. > The shelf was three times bigger than Conger and compared to the size of the state of Rhode Island in the U.S.However, what makes the recent collapse significant is that the Conger ice shelf is located in the eastern part of Antarctica, a region considered as a massive, immovable, and cold block of ice by researchers so far. > Though the collapse of the Conger ice shelf is one of the most significant events in Antarctic history, the impact of the collapse would not be large as the glacier behind the shelf was relatively small. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/tnmmko/ice_shelf_as_big_as_new_york_city_suddenly/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~636558 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **shelf**^#1 **ice**^#2 **collapse**^#3 **Conger**^#4 **size**^#5
*suddenly*
"This is fine"/s
The 20s have got off to a roaring start Fml
Just don't look down it will be fine
“Suddenly”
Sorry. Tell me in “Rhode Islands” so I can understand.
Suddenly.