Pinned post

There are going to be vast changes to our lives in the coming decades.

Without restructuring the economy our planet will become more and more hostile and we'll face untold misery.

But we can also choose to scale down and find balance with nature.

The choice is ours.

And even with all those boxes checked, carbon offsetting is only justified when used temporarily to help get an industry over a rapid transition period to no emissions.

So for example offsetting holiday flights is always a scam and .

Show thread

Carbon offsetting is mostly a scam. The term needs to be reserved only for projects that:

a) increase net carbon sinks when taking into account the entire lifecycle emissions from construction and maintenance,
b) can be completed without violating any other planetary boundaries (biodiversity, fresh water, chemical pollution, etc), and
c) would not happen on their own without the offsetting project.

So reforestation of destroyed land, and almost nothing else.

About "sustainable aviation fuels" (SAF): isn't this just yet another industry wanting their share of the very limited sustainable biofuel supply? Is there something airplane-specific that prevents SAFs from being used for other more important needs instead of luxury for the 1%?

Today with ( Finland) we're protesting against and and blocking a street in Helsinki city center. Finland must reduce material use by 70% – 81% to stay within planetary boundaries.


The Spanish Minister of Consumer Affairs, Alberto Garzón, calls for and eco-socialism in this fantastic, well-researched post.

It's so inspiring to see these ideas starting to break through also at the political level!

I also fear these kinds of efforts can well get attention and funding, and thus feel effective.

But this is how works: it will try to assimilate those who try to oppose it. Climate activists need to be aware and stand united in opposition to systemic violence.

Show thread

I've been sad to learn some western climate activists have started pushing geoengineering. This is bad idea for many reasons, but the biggest is that it's politically unwise. Advocating for a techno-fix will inevitably weaken demands for a system change.

Hello new followers! I've been bad at hashtags, which are crucial here for discoverability, so here's some of them.

I try to toot interesting things related to about / / , from the perspective of / / . I'm one tiny part of .

I build / / and using and will write more about that soon.

Third, occasionally , .

WG III Chapter 5 is an ode to . Focus on suffiency – "measures and daily practices that avoid demand for energy, materials, land and water while delivering human wellbeing for all within planetary boundaries" – is radical and inspiring.

Show thread

Reading this article by Farhana Sultana on was so powerful in so many ways.

I got a long list of references on the many different viewpoints to and colonialism.

I was philosophically challenged by the strong arguments for plurality of not only views and practices but knowledge, instead of seeking universality.

I was emotionally moved by the personal journal entries, skillfully included in an academic text.

Heartily recommended!

Green growth – claim that we can both keep growing GDP and stop – is a myth. This was echoed by based on robust empirical evidence from ecological economics.

For those who still refuse to let go, this report found out that

"[T]here are not enough minerals in the currently reported global reserves to build just one generation of batteries for all EV’s and stationary power storage, in the global industrial ecosystem as it is today."


Wonderful people of ( Finland) and have stopped a Russian coal train heading to Europe.

Finland must stop accelerating Earth breakdown and funding Putin's war machine. Ban Russian coal and oil transit now.

The WG II report warned about 700 million people being displaced because of water shortages in Africa. That's half of the continent's entire population.

When? Not by 2100 nor by 2050, but by 2030.

Breakdown on decoupling reveals the IPCC report text gives unwarranted green growth hopium the referenced science doesn't support: no country is nowhere close to a path to 2°C if GDP growth is maintained.

Show thread

Did you know over 1000 scientists engaged in civil disobedience yesterday all over the world? This was massive: scientists are trained to be cautious, so getting this many to act should have been a top story.

Media coverage? Zero. An utter disgrace.

Timothée Parrique has the initial take on how is featured in the report. This post lists only the direct mentions, but there are much more sections covering degrowth topics implicitly.

Overall the references are very powerful and revolutionary!

Show thread

For those thinking that chapter 5 is about the same old carbon footprint we've heard for years, Amy Westervelt breaks down here how the research is much more systemic and powerful.

Show thread

The analysis of the IPCC WG III report is slowly trickling in, and it seems many have underestimated how radical the proposals really are.

I'll be posting the best sources about and in this thread.

Why is that sentence too dangerous?

Might it be because it points directly at the massive scale lobbying by the fossil fuel industry for subsidies and drilling licenses, and also at the influence of the economic elite making sure capital accumulation continues?

Show thread

Because Scientist Rebellion leaked the Summary for Policymakers, we e.g. know now that:

"Conflicts between mitigation and other development objectives can act as an impediment to climate action and can be amplified by vested interests."

was cut.

Show older

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.