‘Net zero won't change the way we live’ | Free Lunch on Film

For the start we need a crackdown on planned obsolescence. Just produce more good stuff and significantly less crap. It would greatly reduce consumption of all kinds of raw materials and fuels.

Top1% account for 15% of total CO2 emission. Whereas Bottom50% only account for 7%. There are a lot that established countries can do if they consider it seriously.

It worked for Norway because they had a big windfall from the North sea oil and gas extraction.

There is a tremendous amount of magical thinking in this video. Degrowth without destroying our lifestyles is simply not possible by 2050 let alone 2030!

One point missed in this video is the fossil fuel subsidies that currently exist. Coal plants exempt from disposing of nuclear waste in their waste stream, oil and gas wells that only pay tax after all costs for a well have been paid. Low cost leases on government land. Limits on holding companies accountable to the distruction of land during exploration, or exploitation.

This misses many points... Society is broken in so many ways, we should be looking to change the way we live for reasons equally as important as reducing carbon

It's not just about carbon in the air. We consume 1.7 earth's worth of resources a year. We are pushing through our planetary boundaries at an increasing rate. The whole definition of growth needs to be looked at. We need to be happy with steady state in the developed world i.e. no growth and use the efficiencies created by use of green tech to lift those in the developing world to our level.

cant help but notice that all the utopian talk is coming out of nice kitchens, private gardens or rooftop London apartments. Not to mention how reliant it all is on innovation that hasn't happened yet. Just look at any '40 years in the future ' illustration to see how wrong those predictions turn out. Also the war can just as easily show countries that they've been too quick to dismantle and offshore their carbon infrastructure.

I got beat in a middle school student government election by a guy who promised less homework and longer recess.

Big problems need complex solutions. This challenge involve technical approaches and behavioral ones. We need new ways to generate energy and new consumptions behaviors. There’s no single solution.

Talking about Norway decarbonizing while it at the same time indirectly produces in the vicinity of 100 ton per citizen per year seems a bit weird. 100 ton is roughly 10 times as much as their Scandinavian neighbors.

First we need to get rid of the financial system based on constant growth. That is unsustainable. This is the key.

We “saved” the oceans from plastic pollution with recycling so let’s keep changing nothing to our habits! 😅 (no)

Goddammit start using nuclear power extensively.

This video doesn't put too much emphasis on the meat and deary industry. Also electric cars won't help much if we use cars the way we use them now. In cities we need massive investment in public transport. Trains, trams, metros and buses with a high enough frequancy that people don't need to check the timetable. They should always have priority and dedicated lanes to not get bogged down in traffic which is 70% cars with 1 occupant. Encourage active travel and make it expensive to use your car in the city while making public transport cheap, reliable and frequent. A modal shift from cars to public and active ways of transport is going to give you much greater results. Also domestic flights should not be a thing if there's a train alternative within a reasonable time travel. Invest in public transport! Also the fact that we should continue to consume as we do is just silly and dangerous. We need political will. In the UK, the current goverment is useless on climate change. Please vote for anyone that removes the Conserviteves from goverment.

Its exactly like the hole in the ozone, just if 90% of the companies in the world were chemical engineering firms who specialised in CFCs..

Capturing carbon dioxide from the ocean is also a very important topic that is not being talked about enough. It's in early stages but pilot projects are already in the works. If it works, not only it's possible to capture carbon dioxide in a useful way, but the byproducts could offset the costs to the point of making it profitable. Carbon capture from seawater with electrolysis can separate carbon chemically, releasing 3 main byproducts: 1- hydrogen (this alone can offset it's costs by around half) 2- Calcium carbonate and magnesium carbonate. This is where the magic happens, because you are solving 2 issues. Capturing and storage. It's much more difficult to storage carbon dioxide with the current suggested methods proposed by direct air capture advocates. With this method you sequester carbon in mineral form, so it doesnt become a problem. Actually, calcium carbonate and magnesium carbonate have multiple applications: soil regenaration, cosmetics, pills, paint and even in construction, since its basically limestone. So imagine that! by producing this minerals, you can essencially also reduce the carbon footprint in other businesses like the construction industry, so it has a double effect, by sequestering carbon in buildings themselves. Oh! and also, the resulting water that was processed by this technique can be then used as preprocessed water to ease the water desalination process that is already energy intensive. So this sort of electrolysis plants would fit perfectly next to desalination plants, also helping reduce the carbon footprint there, making it even more economical. It just makes me so anxious that this is not being implemented world wide. Serious capital should be invested in this.

There's a reason why the fossil fuel companies are lobbying for Carbon Capture and Storage in combination with Hydrogen production. They make H with gas. They pump CC into oil wells, which releases further locked away fossil. We really need to make them pay, at the moment at least 95% of their investment is spent on business as usual, and some of the 5% is simply greenwashing.

For me, population reduction is not only about decarbonising, it is also about diversity, handing some land space back to mother nature.

I am short term de-growth long term techno optimist. I just hope civilisation can survive the next few decades without doing too much damage to the planets habitability.