Some interesting research into agrivoltaics, combining solar panels and crops: https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/09/crops-under-solar-panels-can-be-a-win-win/
Better water retention for the crops and cooler temperatures for both the crops and the panels. Shade for workers. Creates problems for mechanized harvest, though.
Carbon emissions are subdivided into "energy production", "industry", "transportation", and "agriculture."
Clearly there are crisp technical distinctions among these, or nothing could be quantified, but from an intuitive perspective there are so many overlaps it's really hard to think about these categories.
When I first came into climate activism I grudgingly accepted that all that mattered was getting action and that the best way to get that action was making selfish economic or environmental arguments.
(You'll be better off, the ski-slopes you love will be gone)
I now believe that this is entirely wrong. Without a ethically right approach to the world and humanity we will fail to meaningfully address the climate crisis.
If we, on a societal level, do not change our ruthless competitive mindset there are far too many ways for the wealthy West to escape the worst of the coming catastrophe at the cost of livelihood and lives in the Majority World (escape for a few additional decades that is).
Should we fail to grasp the ethical dimension of the climate crisis and allow greed and selfishness to prevail our children will be left with the worst of our exploitative, colonial heritage while millions of children in the Majority World will have died after a short life of suffering.
If you have money to spare, show solidarity with the people fighting climate and social devastation, donate to the Landless Workers' Movement (MST), a group that has been actively fighting the commodification of the amazon for decades:
Sometimes it seems like the best solution is to turn inward, and try to focus on getting the resources we need from within our own regions, but regionalism seems to invite other forms of oppression.
One proposed solution is to boycott the corporations that are entangled in mining and agriculture in Brazil, including Unilever, which not too long ago was being held up as a model for sustainability (so far as international corporations go, which arguably is not far at all).
But if that's the case, where should consumers go for basics like soap and laundry detergent?
What about this NYTimes opinion piece, which advocates working with Brazilian state and municipal governments to promote rainforest based industries?
Is this healthy respect for sovereignty, or just more toxic capitalism?
I support this article on principle, but I also think allies in the Global North need more guidance to understand the distinction between "solidarity" and treating indigenous people as "essentialised guardians of the forest."
Cybrespace is an instance of Mastodon, a social network based on open web protocols and free, open-source software. It is decentralized like e-mail.