Does "Every Little Thing" REALLY Stop Climate Change?

Lobbying is just a fancy word for bribery lol

It was Big Oil (BP) that coined the term 'carbon footprint', trying to put it as an everyday person's responsibility rather than theirs.

We need trains, trams, subways and bikes lanes everywhere

A very important point, but it is still wise for people to not freaking waste stuff. I see too many cars idling in a parking lot, too many people throw away perfectly good food, or perfectly good clothes, and so on.

I think a reason why many people go with the "what can I do as an individual", is also 'cause while already trying to steer the ship towards better climate solutions on a national scale, it's a lot harder for an individual to effect this. So if you want to do anything as an individual, you may have to fall back on the smaller initiatives, because while not big and statistically significant solutions, they are something. I will also argue that they are valuable, not in the sense of actual carbon reduction, but rather in changing the mental framework of yourself, and those around you. If you as an individual don't care about your own footprint in any way shape or form, I find it highly unlikely that you'll be someone who'll push for the larger decisions needed to right the ship when in a company, or in an election.

I can't change public policy, either. Yes, by recycling and composting my food I am not really stopping climate change. But I'd rather do that than throw my hands up and benefit the landfill owners with the recyclable materials they call "waste".

And here I was thinking banning plastic straws was going to save the world. 🙂 Really, the shifting of blame to the consumer is intentional, so companies can say they're just responding to the market. After CAFE fuel standards were raised car manufacturers started pushing Crossover SUVs because "those are the cars that Americans want" when really, these vehicles are classified as light trucks and therefore have lower fuel standards but can be sold for more profit. Now energy companies are pushing stories about "how green energy is destructive to our heartlands" because they don't want people to build solar and wind, and instead want us to rely on coal and natural gas

This is what Ive been trying to tell my students for years now. I will say there are a few things individuals can do, mainly take advantage of policy changes/subsidies when governments actually implement them (See the inflation reduction act in the USA). Let others know about those policies and vote for and demand good climate policy. US viewers, go get a subsidized heat pump or heat pump water heater, upgrade your electrical panel, its paid for (depending on your income) and necessary to get to net zero.

26 percent of your graph was listed as “spending”. I can only conclude that it refers to the rampant wasteful consumption of nonessential junk. Yet personally cutting out the junk won’t do anything? Everyone needs to do everything they can. Blaming oil companies, the rich, or useless politicians only hurts the effort. Little personal gains keep us focused on the issue daily. Keeping focused helps put more pressure on those companies and politicians. Same goes for recycling. Don’t blame the companies for your personal choice to buy disposable garbage when you can get anything you need not wrapped in plastic. Some of us can hold more than one idea or opinion in our head at the same time.

So, this is partially correct, but it misses the point of mass changes in behavior based on enough people having made that change which for the life of me I can't remember the term for that, oh yes, critical mass. So, if I live in a sunny area and install solar panels and it works well for me and I tell others about it, more people do the same. Now, this is a big cost factor, installing solar panels so what if there are enough people wanting to install panels but the cost is high. Can the group of people learn to install panels, bypassing the installation costs by having a group of people share in this work? Yes, yes you can. It used to be common in society. Can you help bring down costs for materials if installations are happening all over the country or world? Yes, yes you can, because of economics of scale. I remember that term. In fact solar panels are now pretty cheap compared to 15 years ago. Can enough people installing solar panels on their roofs affect the power producers? Why yes they can, but at the same time you can't let the govt. try to punish the people for it and reward power companies allowing them to keep doing what they're doing.

8 minutes of absolute smackdown packed into a polite presentation of facts. None of what was said can be disputed. It's time people organized to actually drain this swamp. Thank you for informing the public.

Opening line reminds me a quote If everyone does a little, we’ll achieve only a little - David MacKay - RIP (former Chief Scientific Advisor of the Department of Energy and Climate Change, United Kingdom - RIP )

There is nothing more powerful than people demanding system change who also practice what they preach. Eventually everything draws down to a complete change of our individual lifestyle.

While the actual impact happens on big scale, individuals have the power to move markets. If we all stopped consuming beef & dairy, the largest global driver for methane emissions and destruction of forests in agriculture is significantly down. There are fantastic other sources protein and calcium for you. Favouring electric trains over cars for local and regional transport drops the direct energy emissions to a fraction. etc, etc... With these kinds of actions, we can move markets and steer the economy to a much greener future.

Here's my problem with this message - it leads to climate "apathy" ("who cares what I do, it's the government's/corporation's fault!" - even though those govs' decisions and those corps' profits are driven by our consumption patterns and voting), and entrenches lifestyles that lead people to oppose systemic changes that could make a difference. E.g. - funding public transit rather than roadways, reallocating road space for bus and bike lanes and better sidewalks, and increasing fees on cars and gas would all reduce our transportation emissions. But they also all make it harder to drive, and so people who drive oppose them! If we encourage people (who are able to) to make better decisions, we are building a constituency that also supports policy that makes those lifestyle changes easier for others. That's how we get these things up to scale.

It's always easiest to blame those with no control and pretend they're the ones with the agency to fix things. Abusers do this all the time--It's just a larger version of it that encompasses millions.

What is important to keep in mind is: the chance that we have on mitigating climate change in a way that lets humanity survive the next couple of millennia starts with people doing what they can do about the problem! If you try and recycle your trash, mend your clothes and ride your bike to work, you will not single handedly mitigate climate change, that’s true. What is also true is that not doing these things will not only not mitigate climate Change, it will make it worse. The kind people of people who think that they can have an impact will also be the ones who will hopefully vote like they can create an impact. The cumulated consumer decisions (or better still: decisions not to consume some goods) of millions of people can have an impact on the decisions of the bosses of industries that do have an impact on climate change! While it is true that we need big societal changes it is the wrong message to say that what we can do as individuals doesn’t count!

As individual, we are doomed to fail. As a society, we can still act. Let's remember this when we'll get to vote, whether in June or November.

My concern about this video is the focus on “every little thing.“ We need to take the word “little“ out of that. We need to focus on “every thing.“ That certainly does include our small individual changes, but it also suggests that when we are committed to small individual changes, we are more likely to be committed to voting in ways that will bring larger systemic changes. To see this as either/or is inadequate. It needs to be both/😢

I disagree about the thesis of this video, because I think it misunderstands what "do every little thing" is really about. It's not really about getting individuals to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions because we think individuals will make a difference. We know they won't for the reasons you cited. It's about getting people to care about the whole picture. Individuals who are willing to do "every little thing" in their own lives, even though individually they don't have much impact on greenhouse gas emissions, are also willing to vote for politicians who will put in place the laws and regulations that force corporations, whether Big Oil or Big Ag, to do what they need to do to reduce their industrial emissions so big impacts will be made. People who don't care about their own GHG emissions are not going to care about whether the politicians they're voting in want to crack down on corporate environmental damage. And too many of that kind of voter are going to mean that politicians aren't going to care about the environment, the corporations won't be forced to clean up their act, and no big impacts will be made.