#small environmental footprint

[kneptoon]

Shoutout to leftists who are too poor/disabled to give back to their community.

Shoutout to leftists who are too poor/disabled to shop at local/small businesses.

Shoutout to leftists who are poor/disabled and have to buy things from Amazon and other megacorps because it’s the most cheap or convenient.

Shoutout to leftists who are too poor/disabled to reduce their environmental footprint because they need the single-use plastics.

Shoutout to leftists who can’t go vegan because of dietary needs, disordered eating, or neurodivergence.

Shoutout to leftists who can’t volunteer or go to community events/protests/noise demonstrations because of inaccessibility.

Shoutout to leftists who can only be politically active online because they’re housebound.

Shoutout to leftists who are disabled and are rarely politically active because they simply don’t have the energy.

Shoutout to leftists who can’t be politically active because they’re under the care of a guardian or are trapped in an abusive situation, and they don’t have control over their finances/belongings.

Shoutout to leftists who can’t read theory, or who have trouble reading theory, but still do their best to learn.

Shoutout to leftists who can’t understand theory at all because of cognitive/intellectual disability.

Shoutout to leftists who want to be more active in their community but can’t because they struggle with anxiety, socializing, or maintaining relationships.

Shoutout to leftists with personality disorders, complex trauma disorders, conduct disorders, OCD, psychosis, and any other leftist whose personality or thoughts often unwillingly go against their beliefs due to a trauma response or chemical imbalance.

Shoutout to leftists who don’t have any “practical” skills that would be needed in a commune (i.e farming, building, sewing)

Shoutout to leftists who are too busy simply trying to survive to even think about being politically active.

Shoutout to leftists who have to always ask for mutual aid but can never give back.

Shoutout to all the leftists who can’t do this and can’t do that and can’t do the things that leftists are “supposed” to do. No one person is perfect.

You aren’t a fake leftist for not being able to do these things. All that matters is that you put in the effort, in whatever way that you can.

It’s not about your abilities as an individual. It’s about our power as a collective.

[dipnots]

5 Practical Ways to Use Wind Energy for a Sustainable Future

Wind energy is one of the most promising sources of renewable energy. It is a clean and sustainable source of energy that has the potential to significantly reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. While wind turbines for electricity generation are the most common application of wind energy, there are many other practical ways of using this energy source. In this blog post, we will explore some of…

[reasonsforhope]

"A first-of-its-kind report has discovered that altering the ingredients list or manufacturing methods of widely used medication can really cut back on carbon emissions.

They found a reduction of 26 million tons, enough to cancel out the whole carbon footprint of the city of Geneva for a decade. Best of all, it’s already happening, and in fact, is almost done—those emissions were already saved.

The lifesaving HIV treatment dolutegravir (DTG) is used by 24 million people worldwide.

Today, over 110 low and middle-income countries have adopted DTG as the preferred treatment option. Rapid voluntary licensing of the medicine, including its pediatric version, to over a dozen generic manufacturers, significantly drove down prices, and it’s estimated that 1.1 million lives will be saved from HIV/AIDS-related deaths by 2027.

Its predecessor, efavirenz, contained 1200 milligrams of active ingredient across the three active compounds present, while DTG contains 650 milligrams of just one compound. This small difference—literally measurable in single digits of paper clips by weight—was enough to change the carbon emissions footprint of the medication by a factor of 2.6.

The incredible discovery was made in a recent report by Unitaid, a global public-private partnership that invests in new health products and solutions for low and middle-income countries, called Milligrams to Megatons, and is the first published research to compare carbon footprints between commonly used medications.

“This magnitude of carbon footprint reduction surpasses many hard-won achievements of climate mitigation in health and other sectors,” the authors of the report write.

At the rate at which DTG is produced, since it entered into production and treatment regime in 2017, 2.6 million fewer tons of CO2 have entered the atmosphere every year than if efavirenz was still the standard treatment option.

Health Policy Watch reports that the global medical sector’s carbon emissions stand at roughly 5% of the global carbon emissions and are larger than the emissions of many big countries, and 2.5 times as much as aviation.

“This report demonstrates that we can achieve significant health improvements while also making strides in reducing carbon emissions. By adopting innovative practices and prioritizing sustainability, we can ensure that medicines like DTG are not only effective but also environmentally responsible,” Vincent Bretin, Director of Unitaid’s Results and Climate Team told Health Policy Watch."

-via Good News Network, July 17, 2024

[gatheringbones]

[“When an issue is framed as a life-or-death dilemma, as a test of commitment or integrity, it’s hard to have an open discussion. If we’re arguing about whether to cut the weeds with a scythe or a weed-whacker, we could argue the pros and cons of each. But if your frame is “Every small decision is a test of our moral commitment to the environment,” there’s not much room for me to argue the merits of the weed-whacker without being branded as an anti-environmental lout. If my partner and I are arguing about which movie to go to, and my frame is “A compatible relationship means perfect agreement — if we can’t agree then we shouldn’t be together,” there’s not much room for my partner to prefer a Russian drama with subtitles over my choice of a light, romantic comedy.

Progressives tend to be morally driven people so integrity and consistency are important to us, and we have strong feelings and strict standards for how people should behave. Yet we live in a world that is not set up to further many of our goals and aims. We are constantly forced into compromises. We often do drive a car to get to the meeting about reducing our carbon footprint. If we want to establish open and vibrant communication, we should take care not to frame every disagreement as a moral test. Instead, we should look for ways to frame our issues that encourage and support diversity and a wide variety of opinions and options. We might reframe the movie argument as, “A strong relationship can stand diversity — if we go see each others’ preferred movies, we’ll each stretch and grow.” We might look at the weed-whacker debate as an opportunity to evaluate the trade-offs of time and energy vs. fossil fuels. Then we can hear all sides of the story.”]

starhawk, from the empowerment manual: a guide for collaborative groups, 2011

[ineffectualdemon]

I saw a post awhile back that's beem stickingnin my craw

It was a post about how recycling and reusing isn't that valuable to helping the environment or reducing waste because it will still ultimately end up in a landfill and and it doesn't cause reduction in that the thing being produced

And some of the examples given bugged me

First one "if you reuse the plastic container into a plant pot it does nothing in reduction and still ends up in a landfill"

Okay but- What if you recycle that plastic pot but next time you buy something made glass and you use that glass jar for storage for a long time. Reducing the need to buy more storage meaning there is less demand for it and if you do recycle it glass is better for actually recycling into new things and you can find projects and artisans who work to create a closed cycle of recycling glass where they crush it up and make it into something new that can then be crushed and made into something new again

Another example of this kind of thing. I have soany different types of tea. I mostly store them in old jars which is better than buying fancy container for them which is what I would do if I did not use old jars

That is a reduction

Second one: "I made things out of old pieces of clothing but I'm not reducing anything because if I didn't I just wouldn't have them"

Maybe that's true for that person. But as a crafter if I don't recycle old bits of fabric or clothing or go to scrapstore I would still want and need to create and would buy new fabric

Reusing or making use of scrap stores is lessening demand for new

Is it a drop of water in the sea? Maybe

But where I am and my situation in the world that's what I can do. I can do my best to buy things I will reuse again and again rather than discard quickly

And maybe thats not a lot but it's something and I don't think it's useless to encourage people to reuse and recycle. I don't think it's useless to try and be as environmentally sound as we can as an individual. Because people do those things out of hope, and the more hope they have the more they feel able to engage in other actions to help the environment such as protesting or working together in groups or anything else you find more effective

By telling people that what they are doing is "useless" or "pointless" or "won't help" you're just killing any drive they have to try and change things.

No me reusing a honey jar to store tea or taking a old shirt and reusing it to make something new is not going to save the planet. But it's a positive choice that I can do in my own home that gives me a small feeling of control that I can than take and apply to the bigger issue and the corporations making the biggest problems

Also how is people not caring and just creating more and more waste rather then trying to shrink their own footprint better?

Why do you think it's useful to drive people into apathetic despair?

Idk I just get frustrated

[chalogreen]

Exploring Eco-Friendly Packaging

What is Sustainable Packaging?

Sustainable packaging uses materials and production processes that yield a minimal environmental impact. The aim is to be environmentally friendly.

Benefits of Sustainable Packaging

Biodegradable - They are made from either plant-based or recycled materials that naturally degrade without leaving toxic waste.

Compostable - Decomposes naturally through commercial compost processes. Leaves no trace of plastic.

Recyclable - Commodities consisting of post-consumer recycled paper are recyclable.

Accountable Materials - For example, mushroom fibers, banana leaves, and algae reduce the over-reliance on plastic and the excessive processes involved.

Ethical production - the use of sustainably sourced, locally produced, and fairly traded materials has proven to improve lives while having a lighter impact on the environment.

Small Carbon Footprint - Eco packaging vastly reduces the carbon emissions resulting from traditional manufacturing and waste.

Simple Swaps

Paper or Plastics - Go for paper envelopes, boxes and filler made from recycled content. Don’t use plastic poly bags and bubbles.

Glass vs Plastic - Choose glass bottles over single-use plastics because glass is infinitely recyclable.Support plastic reduction initiatives.

Compostable vs. Styrofoam - Replace styrofoam peanuts with compostable corn starch alternatives. Support the ban on non-recyclable products.

For stylish, zero waste, environmentally friendly packaging solutions pay a visit to Chalogreen. They manufacture their products which are entirely plant-based thus saving the planet.

[dailyanarchistposts]

II

“We are being led to our slaughter. This has been theorized in a thousand ways, described in environmental, social, and political terms, it has been prophesied, abstracted, and narrated in real time, and still we are unsure of what to do with it. The underlying point is that the progress of society has nothing to offer us and everything to take away. Often it feels like we are giving it away without a fight: when we sell our time for money, allow our passions to be commodified, invest ourselves in the betterment of society, or sustain ourselves on the spoils of ecological destruction, we openly (though not consensually) participate in our own destruction.” — Serafinski, Blessed is the Flame, An introduction to concentration camp resistance and anarcho-nihilism

Civilizations’ death culture of accumulation, exploitation and consumerism, at whatever the cost is at its final stages spreading war and ecocide to every corner of the globe.

It has turned individuals into consumerist herds of wage slaves making us all addicted to some degree or other waiting for the false promises that will never be delivered for most.

How many individuals do actually want to work? I know I don’t. How many actually find pleasure in it having to repeat day after day, after day? Or have to give up on achieving their dreams, or sell themselves in the hope of reaching them?

This is the culture which creates the conditions of refugees fleeing the carnage of war having to walk across a continent to find safety, a better life for themselves and their family all the while begrudging fools would rather see them drown in the medaterian sea along with their children on dinghies so packed with desperate individuals it sinks.

While taking part in solidarity projects I’ve seen mothers in France having to live in muddy fields infested with rats, flimsy tents as protection from the elements. Small groups huddle around fires trying to catch some heat. Babies cries can be heard across the camp. I’ve seen the muddy swamp-like trails that weave through the refugee camp full of rat footprints and urine which appear each morning after the night’s darkness has gone. The very same conditions a 100 years earlier, as the first world war raged on, in the exact same location individuals from lower classes fought it out, blowing each other to smiderians all so wealthier classes could expand their riches!

This is the same culture which creates the conditions for a homeless crisis and makes it socially acceptable for individuals to be left to freeze to death on streets in shop doorways in Dublin’s city centre. I’ve seen the tent cities, the ques of soup kitchens, the desperate.

Society finds this all morally acceptable.The contradiction of civilization couldn’t be any clearer, on the one hand there is riches and wealth beyond beleaf and on the other hand there is poverty and exploitation inflicted beyond comprehension. This is the land of despair, cruelty, and greed.

[puhpandas]

Where was it confirmed that they made Freddy a new body?

this environmental storytelling in ruin!! you can find small/big (gregory and vanessa) footprints in some dust and also marks in a door from freddys foot/fist, showing that 3 star fam has been in the pizzaplex and that freddy has a body now

[drumlincountry]

how about some old style blogging

feeling blown about by the winds of history recently. might be the election. Some of it is Palestine.

The evil empire in which we all live is particularly obviously evil and particularly obviously an empire at times like this. I'm thinking a lot about how the Irish became white, how we are both colonised people and now neo-colonisers.

Last night my mother showed me a small paperback book which belonged to my great-grandfather & I was reminded again that my grandfather's great-grandfather (I think?) landed in our area from probably-galway and the family managed to hold onto speaking irish for A CENTURY until my granddad married an english woman & decided it was rude to teach their children a language she didn't know. I love my granny, but come oooooooon.

& you know my mother did become fluent in adulthood and did her best to pass that on but. you know. failed. Love to have my tongue cut out.

The book was Tóraíocht Dhiarmada agus Ghráinne, and my great-grandfather had annotated it with loads of little pencil notes. That generation is gone & i can barely understand their language. The generation after it is gone except for my great-aunt who lives in Texas. There's a lot I will never know.

I've been thinking a lot about the image of sustainability vs the reality of sustainability. Greenwashing, etc. A lot of people think 'traditional ways' are greener. some of them are. A lot of people think modern high tech solutions are greener. Some of them are. the reality is that we are based in 2024 & no other generation has had to face the crisis we're facing & trying to lift solutions wholesale from any other time will be. ineffective.

So yeah. Image vs reality. sometimes the difference is hard to spot. A solid fuel stove burning wood which is locally grown (using native species, in an area suitable for woodland) & coppiced on a sensible rotation = VERY SUSTAINABLE. A solid fuel stove burning most firewood you can buy = I HAVE MY DOUBTS. A solid fuel stove burning turf = I'M SORRY BUT THIS IS SO SO BAD.

Empires are bad for the environment. This is so basic it feels like it shouldn't have to be said. Empires are bad for the environment!

Irish people only really started burning peat at scale in the 17thc I believe? because colonisation had denuded the landscape of its ancient forests. That great big british navy you know. Those ships had irish bones, among others. My point being: poor people have to make environmentally destructive choices to fucking survive.

The ecological footprint of my lifestyle is largely invisible to me as a citizen of the global north. I don't see the exploitative mining practices, farming practices, manufacturing practices. This is part of the evil of empire. The decision making is concentrated in the imperial core & the imperial core does not give a flying fuck about the ecology of the colonies.

Eating locally sourced food doesn't have much impact on ur carbon footprint btw, but it gives u more transparency.

The artist who designed jamie's engagement ring for me only uses Irish silver in her work, because she knows that 1. Ireland is bound by EU environmental regulations 2. Ireland has SOME level of worker protections 3. If a massive scandalous breach of these standards occured in a silver mine in Ireland, she'd hear about it somehow.

This is part of why I have this quiet worry that my work will betray me. For those who don't know: my job is about paying farmers to be good to the environment.

A few problems with this. 1. commodifying the environment is a dangerous game. if you STOP paying someone to be good the environment they're more likely to stop being good to the environment than they would be if you never paid them in the first place. Think like - paying people to donate blood. the rate of donations actually goes down. 2. if we're going to pay people around here to de-intensify agriculture & we all end up eating food produced in exploitative conditions at the imperial fringe. Well that would fucking suck! 3. the whole idea of the work rests on the idea that people who own big chunks of THE LAND have the right to do whatever they want to THE LAND & the rest of the community (& the state claiming to represent them) can only nudge these land "owners" to do things for the common good. bit too fucking libertarian for my taste. Whatever our paperwork may say, you can't own mud. mud owns itself!!

4. the conservative libertarianism baked into this system isn't a side issue. the fact that land is mostly passed down thru male lines, the association between the farm and the patriarchal family all leads to .....bad fucking politics! lotta queerphobia, misogyny, racism, climate change denial. I see this all the time with the people i work with and it is heartbreaking. If we manage to reverse some ecological destruction without in any way undoing the power systems that birthed it. uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh. We'll have done some good. but I'll be unsatisfied.

Yes you can quote me on that. I will not be satisfied unless my little job teaching people about wildflowers and hedgerows topples the empire of the global north.

Will they betray me? They're already betraying me all the fucking time. Today at work my coworker told me he thinks a local fascist 'had a point about immigrants'.

I betray me too! Not that way, but I'm a tool of empire. I'm dangling money in front of ppl without much of it, enticing them to do what the EU & the state wants them to do.

Today for work reasons I stood in a field and articulately defended the need for farming to continue in Ireland b/c of the benefits it can provide for climate change mitigation and ecosystem maintainence AND the value of our heritage and our traditional attachment to the land. Two people asked to exchange numbers at the end because they want to hear more. I agree with what I said, but it wasn't even half, a quarter of the picture.

The root of the problem is: we have become white. We have become colonists. The Common Agricultural Policy of the EU drives what happens with farming on Many continents & only one of those continents gets to vote on it. If we continue to exploit Africa, South America & Asia for our food, we are like the British cutting down the Irish forests for their ships. The root of the problem is: none of us are free until we're all free.

Last night I held my great-grandfather's book in my hands and remembered that I am living a life beyond his wildest dreams. I have a bright & warm home. Clean running water. Electricity. Cupboards full of food & I don't have to break my back toiling in the fields. I studied in a university. I've travelled farther than he could possibly have imagined.

But if all that comes at the cost of oppressing people the way he was oppressed? I don't want it.

Of course I want it. Everyone wants ease and comfort. I just want it without the cost. I need to not want the cost more than I want the ease. That's the only way to have a soul.

I have some knowledge of what life is like at the bottom of the heap. I am a strong believer in destroying the heap entirely.

I get so very annoyed when anyone refers to a two story house as a 'cottage'.

[rjzimmerman]

Excerpt from this story from Anthropocene Magazine:

People who follow a diet rich in plants cut their mortality risk by almost a third, while simultaneously slashing the climate impact of their food by a similar amount. These results come from the largest study ever to analyze the health and environmental impacts of the widely-publicized EAT-Lancet Planetary Health Diet. 

Launched in 2019, the EAT-Lancet Commission brought together reams of research to determine what would be the best way for us to eat on a global scale, to limit the environmental impacts of farming and food. The Commission came up with a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grain and plant-sourced proteins, and lower in—but crucially not excluding—animal-sourced products like meat and dairy milk. That became known as the Planetary Health Diet. 

Until now, however, the benefits of this diet have been explored mainly on a small scale. The new study takes it up a notch. “This is by far the longest term, large study in actual people to look at both the human and planetary health benefits of the Planetary Health Diet,” says Walter Willett, the Fredrick John Stare professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, and lead author on the research.

His new paper, published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, relied on three pre-existing datasets that drew dietary information from over 200,000 American nurses over a 34-year period between 1986 to 2019. All participants were disease-free when the surveying started, and were required to complete a questionnaire every four years on the makeup of their diets. 

To evaluate this vast trove of data, Willett and colleagues first selected 15 indicator foods that captured the span of dietary impacts, including whole fruits, vegetables, and nuts on the lower-impact end; and red meat, processed meat, and dairy on the higher-impact end. Then, they used these foods to develop an index that allowed them to score the nurses’ dietary surveys by how closely they aligned with the EAT-Lancet suggested Planetary Health Diet. Using a lifecycle-analysis, they estimated the environmental impacts of each reported diet according to those 15 indicator foods.

Because the study also recorded a varied set of health outcomes for the participants—everything ranging from cancer to diabetes, heart disease, lung disease, and neurodegenerative problems—this allowed Willett and team to correlate participants’ dietary trends with their health over the 34-year period. 

Their analysis left little doubt that those who eat diets richer in plants are also healthier, as well as having a lower environmental footprint. In fact, in the top 10% of participants, whose plant-heavy diets most closely matched the Planetary Health Diet, the risk of premature death due to disease was 23% lower than those in the bottom 10% of the survey. These plant-keen participants showed a 14% lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease, a 10% lower risk of death from cancer, a 28% reduced risk of death from neurodegenerative conditions, and strikingly, a 47% lower death risk from respiratory disease.

Meanwhile, the environmental gains of eating more plants were striking too: their diets produced 29% less in the way of greenhouse gas emissions, required 21% less fertilizer, and 51% less cropland area compared to those whose diets scored lowest in the index. The reduced land use could bring significant further climate gains, if it is turned over to wild habitat again, which would lock in more carbon via new vegetation and undisturbed soils. 

[hedoughnism]

I’m in Hot take/ unpopular opinion mood … lets see

- theres nothing wrong with keeping rescued foxes or mink as pets, at the very least it is more humane than keeping pet parrots

- PETA is a good organization, HSUS is a bad one

- Cage free reforms are bad for chickens, ( but most other welfare reforms are good)

- climate change is small potatoes compared to most other environmental problems ( especially habitat loss)

- environmentalists should be less weird about and more embracing of plastic

- I don’t recognize the split of Babirusa into multiple species

- the most popular insecticide in the US by far is a scam that doesn’t even increase crop yields, and should be banned entirely

- I’m accepting the split of reindeer/caribou into multiple species for the time being

- Fiction effects reality

- space colonization is extremely bad

- “ Humans are part of nature” rhetoric always boils down to noble savagery or rejecting environmentalism/conservation entirely in favor of human dominion and supremacy ( this is distinct from “ reject the naturalistic fallacy” which tends to come to the correct conclusion wild animals natural suffering is morally relevant)

- Theres no justification for favoring lion/leopard conservation but not there reintroduction to Europe. Richer people with more resources should be better equipped to peacefully handle conflict with dangerous animals.

- commercial pine wood plantations aren’t forests, anymore then an apple orchard is , and it is not only misleading but blatant lies for federal/state governments or the FAO to describe them as such

- “ X is responsible for Y% of global carbon footprint” style statements from the Media are meaningless, as you can never tell what they include and what they don’t

- Laymen should ignore anything the media says about invasive species, and if they are interested should start by downloading iNaturalist and seeing how much they are surrounded by invasive plants

- There is no justification for hunting and trapping invasive animals

- Palm oil is eco friendly

[khaleesiofalicante]

dani omg I'm freaking out rn

i was told today to prepare for 2 rounds of a debate competition TOMORROW because the person who was supposed to go opted out for reasons i don't know yet

I have so less time

im freaking out

the motion is "Developed countries should have greater responsibility towards addressing climate than developing countries" i have to prepare for the motion. idk all I have is basic points

this is for the preliminary rounds

there are two shortlisted topics for the quarter finals. "billionaires are bad for the world" or "exploring new worlds is a waste of resources"(I don't get this topic) it can be either of the two topics. again I have to speak for the motion

idk what to do😭😭😭😭😭😭😭😭

i'm so stressed

i don't have a speech prepared😭😭😭😭😭

i don't know what points to include

please help🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻

Okay. Okay. You got this.

The topics are relatively easy. I'm going to give you some broader points which you can further enhance by adding some data, okay?

For this - Developed countries should have greater responsibility towards addressing climate than developing countries - Here are some important arguments. Remember what I said before, it doesn't matter if your points are "basic". It's how you say something, not what you say.

Historical Responsibility: Developed countries have contributed the most to global emissions historically, which is why they bear more responsibility. (In other words, they've been doing this shit for longer than the rest of the world. Do some research on some of the earliest companies that have contributed to pollution and see where they are located)

Current Emissions: Even today, developed countries have higher per capita emissions compared to developing countries. They continue to have larger carbon footprints due to their high levels of consumption and industrial activity. Get the data for this!

Financial Capacity: Developed countries have more financial resources to invest in clean energy, technology, and climate mitigation efforts. They also have laws and regulations about this - you can share an example or two about some developed countries that have strict laws on climate change/pollution.

Technological Advancement: Developed countries have the technology and innovation needed to address climate change effectively. They should lead in developing and sharing green technologies with developing countries. Again, give an example here, about a tech solution one of the developed countries has come up to address climate change.

I don't know how much time you have, but these four points are more than enough to have you covered.

Topic 2 - Billionaires are bad for the world (I love this one lol)

I would actually suggest you start this by establishing who and what a billionaire is. Like what it actually means to be a billionare.

For eg:

"To grasp the magnitude of a billionaire's wealth, consider this: A million seconds is about 12 days. However, a billion seconds is over 31 years. This stark difference between a million and a billion demonstrates just how vast a billion truly is."

As for your points:

Wealth Inequality: Billionaires exacerbate wealth inequality, with a small number of people controlling a significant portion of global wealth. This concentration of wealth leads to social and economic instability. (This is like one of your major points).

Influence on Politics: Billionaires can influence political decisions to favor their interests, often at the expense of the greater good. Their financial power can undermine democratic processes. (A lot of examples can come from countries like the US or even India!)

Monopolies and Competition: Billionaires often create or sustain monopolies, stifling competition and innovation. This can hurt consumers and small businesses.

Ethical Concerns: The methods by which some billionaires accumulate wealth can involve exploitation, environmental degradation, and unfair labor practices. (Another big point)

I think for this one, examples (of billionaires and how their wealth has contributed to wealth inequality) would be very helpful.

Topic 3 (or what I understood from it) - Exploring new worlds is a waste of resources

I think what they mean here is looking for other planets to live. There is a lot of money and time being spent on finding other inhabitable planets. I like this topic too because for me the essence is instead of wasting money on finding a new world, why don't we spend that money on fixing this one?? Anyway, your points:

Resource Allocation: The resources spent on space exploration could be better used to address pressing issues on Earth, such as poverty, hunger, and climate change. (What I said before). You could give an example here and say in 2023, xxx amount was spent on exploring Mars as an option (random example!!) but that money could've been used to address climate change in XXX which is a more pressing concern.

Environmental Concerns: Space exploration has environmental impacts, including the production of space debris and the carbon footprint of rocket launches. (Research needed here!).

Ethical Considerations: There are ethical concerns about potentially exploiting other planets or celestial bodies, repeating the same mistakes we’ve made on Earth. Basically, it's like we fucked earth and we're gonna dump it and find a new one to fuck over??? Nope!

Anyway, I hope this is all help!

I know this sudden announcement has you nervous, but remember the judges/competition isn't going to know you were put on the spot, only you do. So, be calm and confident. That's the most important thing tbh.

Good luck!

[gothfoxgirlboy]

“Moss”

He/Him/Xe/Xem

Moss is a nature spirit who guards forests. He is fat with light brown skin. His hair is a mottled brown and green, he keeps it cut short and doesn’t bother shaving. He has a nice beard and a fuzzy chest. Xes skin is slightly rough but warm, and xe has short horns resembling twigs that grow from xes forehead. He is 6’5 and weighs 297 lbs at age 36. Moss cares deeply about preventing waste, so he tends to wear jewelry made of teeth and bones, always keeping his lucky bone knife on his necklace, and clothing made out of natural leather. In other words, he is a leather daddy. He boasts an impressive 11” cock and thighs that crush watermelons as a warmup.

Moss is a hardworking man who is well-respected and frequently gets arrested at protests. When xe isn’t at a environmental protest, xe works as a leather worker, often going around to local butchers and farmers and buying hides and bones that otherwise would have gone to waste. He tries to keep his carbon footprint low and uses natural scents and soaps when he needs to wash up. He is kind and caring but not afraid of a fight, he’s loud and outspoken about his love of nature and animals.

Moss was born and raised in a small cottage in the woods, his mother was a nature spirit and his father was a lumberjack. Though his parents started out on bad terms they grew to love eachother through mutual understanding and teaching of healthy practices. These same practices of sustainability and conservation shaped Moss more than anything else. He grew up surrounded by nature, foraging and occasionally hunting. He learnt many tradeskills to repair rather than replace. His mother was a hippie and would also frequently get arrested, he started going to protests with her in his late teens. In his mid 20s he started exploring queer clubs and music which led him to his career of leatherworking.

Moss is a service top, he keeps custom-made leather harnesses, swings and accessories that he loves having used on him. He’s hung like a horse and has the stamina for sexual marathons. He isn’t scared of hair when he’s eating someone out. He’s bisexual and has a kink for size difference. He likes being degraded and petplay, having made multiple puppy play masks. 

Kinks: Size difference, submission, bondage, puppy play, musk, service topping, outdoor sex.

Newest adoptable for y'all. same as the others bidding starts at 3$ CAD and raises by .50$. 3 Dollars for the story once purchased.

Bidding closes on the 23rd

[catherinetcjd]

Agglomerated Cork Herringbone Floors

~ 11 Maxis-Matching Color Options in 2 Size Variations ~

Agglomerated cork - the "Green" choice!

The reason for such a low ecological footprint lies in two qualities of cork: it is both recyclable and biodegradable. This means that even during the manufacturing process, cork waste is reused and ground to make agglomerated cork products, never going to waste.

Agglomerated cork is formed from smaller granulated pieces of cork bound together using pressure and adhesive, creating an economical alternative to pure natural cork. In the architecture and construction industries, cork is frequently used for building cladding and flooring, due to its environmentally friendly qualities and visual appeal. In contemporary construction, architects are also experimenting with the use of cork bricks and panels as structural elements for small residential projects.

These "Herringbone" cork floors were created for TS2 by CatherineTCJD of Sims Virtual Realty and MTS. The floors come in 11 Maxis-Matching color options, and two sizes variations. They are found in the 'lino/laminated' floor category for $6 each.

Read more »

Enjoy! 🦚

DOWNLOAD @ SFS

Or MTS

[darkmaga-retard]

By Jesse Allen

Over 100 climate groups are pressuring JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, and other private banks to stop financing global meat and dairy companies. Agriculture Dive Dot Com says the institutions’ lending activities undermine their environmental commitments. An open letter from groups led by Friends of the Earth to some of the world’s biggest banks calls for a halt on any new financing that expands industrial livestock production and to add requirements that meat, dairy, and feed clients disclose their climate action plans. The letter calls out the banks by name for supporting the world’s biggest meat, dairy, and animal feed producers like JBS, Tyson Foods, and others. While food companies are a small part of the banks’ overall lending portfolios, the groups say they have a much bigger impact on the institutions’ environmental footprints. The letter says increased lending has let the world’s biggest emitters grow their operations and emissions.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Chicken sales have benefited from the relentless propaganda war against red meat, as a result of which, some consumers have been persuaded on the basis of selective and misrepresented data, that chicken is a better choice for planetary, animal and personal health. “I don’t eat red meat, but I do eat chicken sometimes.” How often have you heard that said? Superficially, that stance might seem enlightened, but the reality is that in this country, UK or EU reared red meat from truly sustainable, pasture-based systems will almost always be a more genuinely progressive choice than chicken. UK-reared beef, lamb, goat and venison is produced more extensively than chicken (and pork, for that matter). Sheep, cattle and other ruminants are rarely raised exclusively indoors in Britain. Farmed deer are still in the field for the best part of their lives. These animals live on a diet of mainly pasture and forage, making use of land that is often unsuitable for growing other crops. They can flourish eating grass, herbs and shrubs, effectively transforming sunlight, rainwater and soil nutrients into some of the most nutrient rich foods available to us. While many UK-reared cattle are now finished on a diet that includes some cereals, they typically spend the greater part of their lives grazing outside, and for people seeking the most sustainable meat option, produce from 100% grass-fed animals is available. The more cereals that are fed to an animal, the less resource efficient its milk or meat is. This is because productive arable farmland, that could be used for growing food to be fed directly to people, is used for growing lower grade livestock cereals, from which only 17-30% of calories are returned for human consumption as meat or milk. Alternatively, the cereals used for animal feed may be grown in other regions of the world and shipped vast distances – which brings us back to chicken. We eat a billion chickens each year in these isles, and they do not lead remotely content or natural lives. Almost all (95%) are from fast-growing breeds, intensively reared in vast, tightly packed, indoor facilities and they are slaughtered at as little as 28 days. While chickens are a relatively small bird, their environmental footprint is significant. The Soil Association’s report, Peak Poultry, details that roughly three million tonnes of soya are imported into the UK each year, and most of it is bought by chicken producers to fatten chickens. Typically, this soya comes from Latin America, a crop that contributes to deforestation and pesticide use in biologically important areas, such as the Amazon and Cerrado. There are at least 1,000 intensive poultry units throughout the UK. This marks an increase of more than 30% in the past decade as chicken has been marketed as a more compassionate, healthy and ecological alternative to red meat. Given the complexity of the debate, it’s no wonder that so many of us accept that chicken is a more ethical choice. Put chicken on the menu, whether that’s in school dinner halls or restaurants, and you are likely to invite fewer religious objections, while ‘flexitarians’, and those who describe themselves as ‘plant-based’ eaters will view it as ‘the least bad’ of the possible meat options.