Nature How to help the planet and create a better world?

Environmentalism

I have long been a defender of the environment. I joined the WWF when I was about 9 years old. I still donate regularly. I have since joined or supported to many other conservation groups such as:

- The Nature Conservancy
- Rainforest Alliance
- Rainforest Action Network
- Rainforest Rescue (you can support them through free online petitions too)
- Save the Elephants

I have never really liked the aggressive (sometimes almost sociopathic) approach of Greenpeace though. Furthermore Greenpeace is against genetic engineering and nuclear energy, which I still is only caused by ignorance of their part. There are pros and cons about nuclear plants (see this Kurzgezagt video that summarise them perfectly), but the pros win hands down when it comes to the much safer new generation reactors.


Solar panels

Global warming is a major concern nowadays. You can help fight it by investing (with a very reasonable profit) in solar panels in developing countries with Trine, a Swedish company. It goes without saying that I have installed solar panels on my house. But one house is not enough. To really make a difference, help thousands of people get solar energy. Rich countries are trying to phase out dirty power plants (coal, oil, gas). Developing countries need to choose how they are going to power their future as they industrialise and their population increase. It's essential that their future stays green. The world just can't afford 2 or 3 more industrial, polluting China's (and fortunately the Chinese are now starting to increase their proportion of clean and renewable energy, but that will take time).


Recycling

When we see only what plastic pollution does to our planet, it's easy to feel like our future is doomed to live amongst piles of rubbish/trash. Yet it's easy to recycle and limit the purchase of plastic packaging and, even worse, non-recyclable packages or products. I take great care to recycle as much as possible: plastic containers, other plastics, cans, other metals, paper, glass, batteries, electronics... Please do it too and don't forget to bring chemicals and electric/electronic products to your local recycling centre.


Buying responsibly

I take increasingly great care in choosing companies that are sustainable, respect the environment and human rights.

The destruction of the Amazon and other forests has been a subject of great concern for me since I was a child. It's not just the cutting or burning of trees, but the destruction of whole ecosystems and the disappearance of about 200 species per day (that's 73,000 per year, so millions since my childhood). I feel powerless to do anything about it, especially because so may greedy companies have no qualms destroying those forests (often by just burning them to create farmland, not even for the wood).

What's important is to protect rainforests from destruction (especially by burning) as this is what causes of loss of species. Planting trees is good, but trees will grow back by themselves anyway unless the land is used for plantations (palm, coffee, soy, etc.) or cattle ranches. What really hurts the planet is the irreversible loss of biodiversity. So replanting the vast stretches of the Amazon after it has burned won't help if the harm has already been done.

One of the most important thing to do to prevent deforestation (especially if you live on the American continent), but also to reduce global warming and improve your health, is to reduce your beef consumption. Generally meat has a major negative impact on the environment because of all the agricultural land it requires compared to plant-based food. I strongly recommend this short video to understand why meat is bad, and beef is the worst of all. A lot of people cannot give up meat. At least you can choose chicken, turkey or other fowls instead of red meat.

Another way to save the rainforests is to buy food products that are Fairtrade and respect the environment (such as FSC and Rainforest Alliance labels). It's especially important for tropical products like coffee, tea, chocolate, bananas, coconut and the like. Avoid products with palm oil as palm plantations are one of the main causes of rainforest destruction.

To help you choose ecologically minded companies, please check the CDP website. They give a score from A to F to most of the major companies worldwide (as well as cities) for the sustainability regarding 3 categories: climate change, water security and deforestation.


Humanitarianism

All human beings share the same need for safety (from violence, infectious diseases, pollution), food and a minimum of comfort. In countries where wars, famine and diseases claim the lives of many, people have more children to make up for it, hoping that at least some will survive. Once countries become more peaceful, wealthier and healthier people automatically reduce their number of children to dedicate more time to their children's education and well-being, but also because it is a heavy personal investment in time, energy and money to have lots of children.

The world population now exceeds 7 billion and is set to increase to 9 or 10 billion by the end of the century. This will put additional pressure on the Earth's resources and cause more global warming, which in turn may lead to failing crops or lack or water in drier regions. To avoid a global catastrophe, it's essential that poorer countries get healthier, wealthier and more peaceful as quickly as possible, so that they can complete their demographic transition and adopt clean energy and sustainable agricultural practices faster. Empowering women by educating them and increasing gender equality is equally important to achieve proper family planning and thus allowing families to dedicate more resources on fewer children, which translates in better education and increased wealth, health and happiness.

I really like what the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation do, especially to empower women in poorer countries and eradicate infectious diseases like polio and malaria. AFAIK it's not possible to donate as the foundation is funded by Bill Gates's personal fortune. There are of course many other charities that will act as effectively. I have done my research and the 5 big charities that will manage your donations optimally for the issues that matter the most and in the most effective way possible are:

- Concern Worldwide : engaged in long-term development work in the world's poorest countries.
- Effective Altruism Global : uses high-quality evidence and careful reasoning to work out how to help others as much as possible.
- GiveWell : redirects donations to charities that save or improve lives the most per dollar (evaluating the cost-effectiveness of the organizations).
- InterAction : is the largest alliance of international NGOs and partners in the United States and aims at eliminating extreme poverty, safeguard a sustainable planet, promote peace, etc.
- UNICEF : aims to immunise children, enhance childhood and maternal nutrition, improve sanitation, promote education in poorer countries.


Microfinancing

Instead of giving money to charities to help people in developing countries, you can finance their projects directly through microfinancing. It's easy to lend money to entrepreneurs and they are almost guaranteed to pay you back (the default rate on altruistic loans is very low, usually about 2 or 3%, and in my experience less than 1%). The most famous is probably Kiva, based in San Francisco, but I have also used the UK-based Lendwithcare. You can choose the sectors and individual projects in which you want to help.

I give priority to improving sanitation (a sure way to avoid the spread of infectious diseases) and installing solar panels. The latter are not just a way to fight global warming. It provides clean electricity to people who often didn't have any electricity before, which is a first step towards better health (no smoke from fire cooking or candle light) and improved education (people can read at night or have a smartphone or computer to educate themselves).

 

[Tutkun Arnaut]

According to myself the planet is protected through heavy taxing of excessive wealth. Anything beyond the natural needs should be taxed heavily to discourage people from unnecessary getting material things. What do I mean by that? One can not pretend is helping the planet when has too many houses. Any extra house should be discouraged since the materials used to build it, a lot of carbon is released to produce these materials. So the list goes on for extra cars, TV, PC, pleasure ships,aircraft's etc. A lot of unnecessary things are build at the expense of environment. Curbing the population growth would help a lot. One child policy for the entire world would do the trick

 

[Maciamo]

According to myself the planet is protected through heavy taxing of excessive wealth. Anything beyond the natural needs should be taxed heavily to discourage people from unnecessary getting material things. What do I mean by that? One can not pretend is helping the planet when has too many houses. Any extra house should be discouraged since the materials used to build it, a lot of carbon is released to produce these materials. So the list goes on for extra cars, TV, PC, pleasure ships,aircraft's etc. A lot of unnecessary things are build at the expense of environment. Curbing the population growth would help a lot. One child policy for the entire world would do the trick

That's completely unworkable. What percentage of the population is going to accept that? Let's be realistic.

 

[Maciamo]

Another effective way to preserve rainforests is to boycott companies that are responsible for massive deforestation. According to the Rainforest Action Network's annual report these include (among others):

- Procter & Gamble (list of P&G brands : includes Ariel, Always, Dawn, Dreft, Fairy, Febreze, Gillette, Oral-B, Mr Clean, Tampax, Tide)
- Unilever (list of brands, including Axe, Ben & Jerry's, Knorr, Lipton, Lux, Magnum, Signal)
- Nestlé (list of brands, including Nestea, Nesquik, Nescafé, Nespresso, Starbucks and plenty of cereals, chocolates, frozen products and infant foods)
- Mondeléz International (includes such brands as Cadbury, Côte d'Or, LU, Milka, Oreo, Toblerone)
- General Mills (list of brands, including Cheerios, Häagen-Dazs, Yoplait)
- Mars (including M&M's, Milky Way, Snickers, Twix)
- Hershey’s

Two others have recently revised their policy regarding deforestation thanks to Rainforest Action Network, but are still on probation:

- Kellogg’s
- PepsiCo

And banks funding deforestation (actually that's most banks, but these are the worst):

- JPMorgan Chase (world’s worst banker of fossil fuels according to Rainforest Action Network)
- Wells Fargo (the second worst)
- Mitsubishi-UFG (the biggest bank in Japan, aka Union Bank in the USA - see report)

 

[Maciamo]

Fair Trade products are most popular in the UK, Benelux, France, Switzerland, Germany and Austria.

Here is the per capita consumption by country.

And the total consumption by country. Note that the UK and USA have an nearly equal consumption of Fair Trade products, even though the USA is 6 times more populous. So British people buy 6x more of them.

 

[Dagne]

I think that in many instances, individual people want to be greener, but corporate practices install systems and believes that are difficult to get rid off.

For instance, use of plastic - it is quite clear that the issue of plastic pollution should be dealt with at the source - banning the use of plastic and replacing it with other options, rather than latter trying to "catch" and recycle it. Now we have a huge problem or microplastic in rivers, seas and oceans. We breath in synthetic particles of material from fabrics, which is a big problem not only in terms how to recycle synthetic fabrics and also because of developing allergies. Another really harmful option is diesel fuels for cars, as it is the main problem with air pollution in cities and which is really bad in very different ways, starting from health problems - strokes, diabetes, asthma, and also lesser developed intellect in children, increased violet crimes, etc.

The same story applies with regard to food industries as well as pharmaceutical business. For food industries it is best that people consume such products, which are well processed (more expensive with larger added value for industries, rather than unprocessed foods) that have long selling period, meaning that they are high in sugar, salt and fats, in spite that it is not good for our health. For health/pharmaceutical industry, similarly, it is good that people consume lots of different drugs, rather than learn how to stay healthy. Flowingly, doctors are mainly trained to treat patients based on symptoms in narrow specialisation (heart issues, eye problems, and so on) by prescribing drugs, instead of advising to change lifestyle.
For instance, if you say to an average person that whole plant based diet would be good for them, they say it is just too extreme, however, half a million people every year will have their chest opened up and a vein taken from their leg and sewn onto their corona artery, which is acceptable ...

True revolution is coming through new technologies in energy - for instance, green electricity that could be generated autonomically - rather than relying on energy distribution networks, power plants and carbon extraction businesses (oil, natural gas, coal, etc) and other currently typical systems.
I really hope we would be getting these generators soon:

Scientists Built a Genius Device That Generates Electricity 'Out of Thin Air'
"We are literally making electricity out of thin air," says electrical engineer Jun Yao from the University of Massachusetts Amherst. "The Air-gen generates clean energy 24/7."
The claim may sound like an overstatement, but a new study by Yao and his team describes how the air-powered generator can indeed create electricity with nothing but the presence of air around it. It's all thanks to the electrically conductive protein nanowires produced by Geobacter (G. sulfurreducens, in this instance).
The Air-gen consists of a thin film of the protein nanowires measuring just 7 micrometres thick, positioned between two electrodes, but also exposed to the air.


By contrast, the Air-gen produces a sustained voltage of around 0.5 volts, with a current density of about 17 microamperes per square centimetre. That's not much energy, but the team says that connecting multiple devices could generate enough power to charge small devices like smartphones and other personal electronics – all with no waste, and using nothing but ambient humidity (even in regions as dry as the Sahara Desert).
"The ultimate goal is to make large-scale systems," Yao says, explaining that future efforts could use the technology to power homes via nanowire incorporated into wall paint.
"Once we get to an industrial scale for wire production, I fully expect that we can make large systems that will make a major contribution to sustainable energy production."
https://www.sciencealert.com/scient...of-thin-air-with-device-that-runs-on-humidity

 

[Duarte]

[h=1]Amazons Invisible Flying Rivers, and more. Save the planet must be the first priority of humanity to guarantee the future of the next generations.[/h]

 

[Maciamo]

I think that in many instances, individual people want to be greener, but corporate practices install systems and believes that are difficult to get rid off.

Hence the need to penalise/boycott companies (often big multinationals) that are responsible for the unecological practices.

For instance, use of plastic - it is quite clear that the issue of plastic pollution should be dealt with at the source - banning the use of plastic and replacing it with other options, rather than latter trying to "catch" and recycle it. Now we have a huge problem or microplastic in rivers, seas and oceans. We breath in synthetic particles of material from fabrics, which is a big problem not only in terms how to recycle synthetic fabrics and also because of developing allergies.

We can't trust all individuals to change their habits. Governments need to push them. That's why plastic bags have already been banned in many countries (including Belgium, France, Italy, Austria, Romania, Albania, Australia, NZ, India and half of Africa) or states (California, Oregon, Washington, New York) and there is a general trend worldwide to phase-out of lightweight plastic bags. Unfortunately the wealthy USA still largely lag behind (apart from the West Coast) instead of showing the example to the world.

Phase out of lightweight plastic bags around the world (laws passed but not yet in effect are not shown on map)
- Plastic bags banned
- A charge on some plastic bags
- Voluntary charge agreement
- Partial charge or ban (municipal or regional levels)

Another really harmful option is diesel fuels for cars, as it is the main problem with air pollution in cities and which is really bad in very different ways, starting from health problems - strokes, diabetes, asthma, and also lesser developed intellect in children, increased violet crimes, etc.

In this regard countries like Belgium and France lag behind because their governments have longed incentivised the sales of diesel cars. They recently changed direction and put heavy taxes on diesel, which used to be cheaper than petrol and is now considerably more expensive. Anyway the EU is setting increasingly stricter emission standards for car manufacturers and many European cities now ban cars that are not at least Euro 4 or Euro 5 compliant. A Euro 5 diesel car will pollute less than a Euro 4 petrol car. The chart below doesn't show it, but all cars manufactured from 2014 must be Euro 6. New diesel cars emit the same amount of particulate matter (PM) and particle number (PN) as petrol cars, and twice less CO than petrol cars. Diesel engines emit some NO, but petrol ones emit THC and NMHC that diesels don't.

The same story applies with regard to food industries as well as pharmaceutical business. For food industries it is best that people consume such products, which are well processed (more expensive with larger added value for industries, rather than unprocessed foods) that have long selling period, meaning that they are high in sugar, salt and fats, in spite that it is not good for our health. For health/pharmaceutical industry, similarly, it is good that people consume lots of different drugs, rather than learn how to stay healthy. Flowingly, doctors are mainly trained to treat patients based on symptoms in narrow specialisation (heart issues, eye problems, and so on) by prescribing drugs, instead of advising to change lifestyle.
For instance, if you say to an average person that whole plant based diet would be good for them, they say it is just too extreme, however, half a million people every year will have their chest opened up and a vein taken from their leg and sewn onto their corona artery, which is acceptable ...

I agree. It's very sad.

 

[Dagne]

Hence the need to penalise/boycott companies (often big multinationals) that are responsible for the unecological practices.



We can't trust all individuals to change their habits. Governments need to push them.

Yes, I agree. But sometimes, Government just pretend that they do something. Like taxing plastic bags in LT but making an exemption for thin simple plastic bags that are handed out for free in supermarkets. The whole system should be changed, otherwise, even if you are very environmentally minded, you often still take that plastic bag, because there is nothing else on hand to put your oranges/potatoes in. Some other solution should be proposed, otherwise the system "will suck you in" doing the wrong thing without even thinking about it...


Also, I think there are believes that need to be changed. For instance, now with coronavirus many people are horrified by the stories about Wuhan wet market where alive and dead animals were sold, blaming the appearance and spread of the novel coronavirus on this. But the whole story and the images may just be misleading.
Non-Chinese ex-pats who live in Wuhan say that this wet market was fine, and many multiple images that we have seen since the coronavirus outbreak are just specific images for shocking and distracting people. If to skip the discussion on the issue of the origins of the coronavirus, the Western food industry practices are much more cruel than those in Chinese wet market. It is only a very very tiny fraction of people who eat wild animal meat in China. One should calmly analyse the statistics what are the amounts of meat/poultry/fish per person consumed in different countries.

In the Western countries people consume lots of meat and poultry and fish where animals and fish are kept in appalling conditions, without being able to move and being wed with growth hormones and antibiotics and then slaughtered in such conditions where they die slowly in torture seeing other animals being killed before they get slaughtered.
I am not attaching any youtube videos from industrial slaughter houses, or poultry factories or fish farms because it is just too shocking. Inasmuch as typical western consumers don't think about it, nobody questions that and all seems to be fine.

But it is not OK, I think such industrialised practices for meat/poultry/fish production should be banned. It is fine if some people want to eat meat/poultry/fish but animals should be kept with respect to their natural needs, given space for movement, being able to go out, provided with more natural environment and feeding, which would also be very beneficial for people who later consume meat of such animals. However, currently, for the food industry, it is better to produce higher volumes of food products, irrespective of the conditions how the animals are kept and killed. In killing only hygiene matters, whereas suffering and horror that animals experience before death is absolutely nothing.

Overall, the world is very fast to start blaming something/somebody following the orchestrated images and narrative.
I am looking forward to watching new Polansky's movie An Officer and a Spy (French: J'accuse) where the parallels with the present times in dangers of following mainstream mass media narrative is clear.

 

[Carlos]

I recycle plastic, paper, organic remains and I can't believe the volume that it becomes. Cooking oil also recycled. The clothes and shoes that I do not wear give them to charity.



Which continents emit more plastic to the sea?

As long as awareness is not global, little can be done since what some save the sea, others can use to increase even their high figures.

 

[Maciamo]

One should calmly analyse the statistics what are the amounts of meat/poultry/fish per person consumed in different countries.

It is especially New World countries (Americas, Australia and NZ) who eat an unreasonable amount of beef. Here are the stats:



The biggest consumers of pork per capita are Central and South Europeans.

Americans are not just among the world's biggest eaters of beef but also of chicken.

Here is a summary of meat preferences by region.

These maps show the per capita consumption in Europe for each type of meat.

 

[Dagne]

From ethical point of view, perhaps animals in Mongolia or Kazakhstan - traditionally kept on the steppe - or on Argentina's pampas or in New Zealand are quite happy compared to cows in Israel, where as I heard, cows for milking are always kept inside, fixed to their boxes as it is too hot and costly to let them out in the open.

Or fish meat - Lithuanians they eat a lot farmed salmon from Norway. However, many Lithuanians go to Norway to work in fish farms, and those who worked there would not to eat it. They say that poor salmons - which is the species capable of migrating really long distances, are kept in such density that they can hardly move and the feed for salmons include colour, antibiotics, strange type of mixtures including bulking agents like poultry litter (that's poop) and hydrolyzed chicken feathers and other stuff that i better not knowing about.
"Analyzing 700 salmon bought in stores from Edinburgh, Scotland to Seattle, Washington, a team led by Ronald Hites, PhD, of Indiana University, found that the farmed product contained up to 8 times more PCBs—cancer-causing industrial chemicals that were banned in 1979—than the wild variety. Other chemicals found in farmed fish include dioxins from herbicides (the most famous being Agent Orange)"
https://www.eatthis.com/shocking-facts-about-farmed-salmon/

They say that if you have a possibility of eating anything else than this farmed salmon - do it. On the surface though doctors are saying that eating fat fish is good for you...

 

[torzio]

It is especially New World countries (Americas, Australia and NZ) who eat an unreasonable amount of beef. Here are the stats:

View attachment 11841

The biggest consumers of pork per capita are Central and South Europeans.

Americans are not just among the world's biggest eaters of beef but also of chicken.

Here is a summary of meat preferences by region.

These maps show the per capita consumption in Europe for each type of meat.

View attachment 11842

Do you have data on the 2 bad types of meats as per duck and lamb ?
or is duck/goose part of poultry ?

 

[Dagne]

Except for Buddhists, I am not sure if typical Christian standpoint includes anything about industrial torturing of animals for profits, at least the Catholic Church does not say anything about it (if one goes to confession, and says that "I have eaten eggs from caged chicken, though I know that this way I support their torture", this would not be treated as a sin by the priest)
Usually people just don't think about it, but it is not OK to consume regular eggs or poultry or any food products that include eggs (some pasta, cakes, rolls, etc.) from ethical point of view.

If people would be asked if they are OK with torturing animals for profits, they would normally answer "No". But if this torturing happens out of their sight, especially if this about eating some product which includes eggs (like your morning egg bread roll) somehow it is OK.

I think Governments should be banning such industrial poultry/egg farming practices, like in case of diesel fuel or plastic, because individual consumptions patterns are manipulated by corporate interests (advertising, mass media narrative, creating general believes, shifting focus to other issues, etc). It is time for rich Western societies to
get rid of such practices.

 

[Maciamo]

Except for Buddhists, I am not sure if typical Christian standpoint includes anything about industrial torturing of animals for profits, at least the Catholic Church does not say anything about it (if one goes to confession, and says that "I have eaten eggs from caged chicken, though I know that this way I support their torture", this would not be treated as a sin by the priest)
Usually people just don't think about it, but it is not OK to consume regular eggs or poultry or any food products that include eggs (some pasta, cakes, rolls, etc.) from ethical point of view.

If people would be asked if they are OK with torturing animals for profits, they would normally answer "No". But if this torturing happens out of their sight, especially if this about eating some product which includes eggs (like your morning egg bread roll) somehow it is OK.

I think Governments should be banning such industrial poultry/egg farming practices, like in case of diesel fuel or plastic, because individual consumptions patterns are manipulated by corporate interests (advertising, mass media narrative, creating general believes, shifting focus to other issues, etc). It is time for rich Western societies to
get rid of such practices.

That's very true and fortunately the European Union has already passed some laws in this regard, notably the European Union Council Directive 1999/74/EC which effectively bans conventional battery cages from 1 January 2012 (even though not all producers comply with the law). In the US, only California and Michigan have similar laws in place.

 

[Maciamo]

Do you have data on the 2 bad types of meats as per duck and lamb ?
or is duck/goose part of poultry ?

Duck and goose meat is included in poultry (as are turkey, quail, guinea fowl, pigeon and pheasant). Here are the stats for lamb, mutton and goat.

 

[Carlos]

I support that by law slaughterhouses are forced to have a camera surgeon and that there is a qualification for work in a slaughterhouse. On the other hand in Spain there are more and more chicken farms in freedom, I have begun to consume that type of eggs.


I do not see ethical or moral release farm animals as they are causing serious damage to the ecosystem and harming protected species.


Rights implies obligations and approaching the issue from the point of view of animal rights is stupidity that leads to harmful situations such as the aforementioned release of farm animals, refusing to eat meat, in addition to other anomalous, passive, aggressive, anomalous attitudes, aggressive assets against the species to which it belongs, producing alienated people from reality and everything to give things a wrong approach from the beginning.


What does not kill you, get you fat

 

[Jovialis]

Support the use of contraception in impoverished countries, to control overpopulation, the spread of STDs, and improve the quality of their lives.

Also, support the the transition of automations taking over manual labor, and factory jobs. Tons of pollution is created, shipping, and flying goods and parts internationally. If production became localized again, it would help to massively reduce carbon emissions. It will also curb the exploitation of desperate people who work as de facto slaves.

 

[Carlos]

Support the use of contraception in impoverished countries, to control overpopulation, the spread of STDs, and improve the quality of their lives.

Also, support the the transition of automations taking over manual labor, and factory jobs. Tons of pollution is created, shipping, and flying goods and parts internationally. If production became localized again, it would help to massively reduce carbon emissions. It will also curb the exploitation of desperate people who work as de facto slaves.

It is very good from the point of view of a mentality that belongs to one part of the world the other part wishing to industrialize would take advantage of the space left by the other part to be able to contaminate more producr more with low costs while the conscious part would stay with the glass of rice paper in hand while the other party would have grown and could supply itself.

 

[Dagne]

That's very true and fortunately the European Union has already passed some laws in this regard, notably the European Union Council Directive 1999/74/EC which effectively bans conventional battery cages from 1 January 2012 (even though not all producers comply with the law). In the US, only California and Michigan have similar laws in place.

I agree, overall the EU influence is positive. At the same time, decision taking is so slow and so compromised with varieties of exceptions. (I am helping to select environmental projects for EU LIFE programme, so there is really a lot of very good ideas, which, if supported at the EU policy level, could produce a lot of change)
Not that I admired Greta too much, but what she says that EU sometimes pretend that they do something, has a lot of truth in it. Everyone agree that the EU countries could do much more. People in their teens can objectively get disappointed with the middle age politicians who do not mentally belong to the future after 2050 and still tend to do things in the old ways.
A friend of mine who is visiting Japan now said that she overheard a conversation between two Japanese teens who were quite happily discussing which place they would move after their parents will die out because of the virus... It sounds a bit macabre, and these teens were just not thinking properly of what they wished, but overall, there is really a strong expectation in the air to get rid of the old ways, and restart a better world.