• PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I remember when the hole in the ozone was something we were all worried about. I remember the news segments and the magazine covers and the protests.

    I don’t remember the massive coordinated media campaigns running into the tens of billions of dollars. I don’t remember an entire political party simultaneously saying there’s no ozone hole and that the ozone hole is actually good for us. I don’t remember rednecks standing in rows on Texas highways shooting AquaNet into the air to own the libs.

    We used to be able to do it. Nixon founded the EPA. There was a general consensus that had a role in reducing pollution and disease. The republicans fought against establishing social security, saying that old people should support themselves and anything else would turn the US literally communist.

    We’ve lost even that much.

    • prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Nixon may have been the guy in charge when we realized we needed the EPA, but let’s not pretend he was some champion for the environment.

      He vetoed the Clean Water Act for fuck sake.

      And from what I understand, the only reason we were able to shift away from CFCs (main pollutant destroying the ozone) was because the alternative was comparable in price, if not cheaper.

    • aesthelete@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I don’t remember the massive coordinated media campaigns running into the tens of billions of dollars. I don’t remember an entire political party simultaneously saying there’s no ozone hole and that the ozone hole is actually good for us. I don’t remember rednecks standing in rows on Texas highways shooting AquaNet into the air to own the libs.

      I honestly think it’s because the sacrifice and change to switch off aerosols was so small and the fossil fuel industry is much less niche and much more powerful. It took much more to get the world off of leaded gasoline and even that was a pretty small change versus the huge shift off of fossil fuels which would have to take place to fix this.

      We’re going to make ourselves extinct because we’re addicted to going vroom vroom. There’s still “car enthusiasts” out there, and people who like to roll coal. And celebrities buying private jets.

      Also, it ties into everything: heating, cooling, electricity… We’re fucked.

      • Mirshe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        Basically this. It was a small ask to not use aerosols for everything. We’re OK with doing things to help the world and people at large when it doesn’t directly affect us that much.

        It’s one thing to ask people to not use their hairspray so much. It’s a whole other thing to say “hey we need to switch away from gasoline engines and cars entirely.”

    • WalrusDragonOnABike@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 months ago

      I feel like I still see people complain about modern refrigerants being less good because environmentalists banning the old ones on rare occasions.

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Having replaced an air conditioner recently, the complaint seems to be “We can’t get the old refrigerant so once our current supply is gone a lot of old units that still work fine are going to have to be replaced.”