@TheGuardian
(3/n)
...#US, #India, #Russia, and #Japan
."
//
A couple of days ago, @breadandcircuses wrote an article about #degrowth, in which he correctly describes how 
the global economic system must be radically altered ("transitioned away from #capitalism," he calls it.)
https://climatejustice.social/@breadandcircuses/111386920334307763
I agree wholeheartedly.
On top of this, however, this transition must include an agricultural revolution that embraces extensive use of #agrivoltaics + #WaruWaru for a 2nd #GreenRevolution...
Climate Justice SocialBread and Circuses (@breadandcircuses@climatejustice.social)Okay, sorry, here is my second MUST READ article of the day. I promise not to overburden you like this on a regular basis, but I hope you will indulge me this time and read and share this vitally important piece from Jason Hickel (@jasonhickel@mastodon.world) in which he tackles the question of Green Growth vs Degrowth...
_________________________
Some prominent commentators seem to assume that the debate is primarily about the question of technology, with green growth promoting technological solutions to the ecological crisis, while degrowth promotes only economic and social solutions. In fact, degrowth scholarship *embraces* technological change and efficiency improvements, to the extent (crucially) that these are empirically feasible, ecologically coherent, and socially just.
But it also recognizes that this alone will not be enough: economic and social transformations are also necessary, including a transition out of capitalism. The debate is therefore not primarily about technology, but about science, justice, and the structure of the economic system.
Degrowth does not call for all forms of production to be reduced. Rather, it calls for reducing ecologically destructive and socially less necessary forms of production, like sport utility vehicles, private jets, mansions, fast fashion, arms, industrial beef, cruises, commercial air travel, etc., while cutting advertising, extending product lifespans (banning planned obsolescence and introducing mandatory long-term warranties and rights to repair), and dramatically reducing the purchasing power of the rich. In other words, it targets forms of production that are organized mostly around capital accumulation and elite consumption.
At the same time, degrowth scholarship insists on strong social policy to secure human needs and well-being, with universal public services, living wages, a public job guarantee, working time reduction, economic democracy, and radically reduced inequality. These measures abolish unemployment and economic insecurity and ensure the material conditions for a universal decent living — again, basic socialist principles. This scholarship calls for efficiency improvements, yes, but also a transition toward sufficiency, equity, and a democratic postcapitalist economy, where production is organized around well-being for all, rather than around capital accumulation.
It is now well-established that green growth scenarios suffer from a difficult problem. They start with the assumption that the rich countries in the “core” of the world-system should continue to increase aggregate production and consumption (“growth”) for the rest of the century. But growth does not come out of thin air. It requires energy. To resolve this issue, green growth scenarios resort to deeply problematic assumptions.
They assume we can overshoot the Paris Agreement limits now and rely on mass deployment of speculative negative emissions technology in the future (mostly bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, or BECCS), to pull excess carbon out of the atmosphere. Scientists have raised major red flags about this approach. BECCS would require vast tracts of land for biofuel monoculture, up to three times the size of India, appropriated overwhelmingly from the Global South, exacerbating deforestation, soil depletion, water depletion, biodiversity loss, and other ecosystem damages, while constraining food availability.
Relying on this approach is unjust and ecologically incoherent. It is also risky, because if, for whatever technological or political reasons, this scheme cannot be scaled in the future, then we will be locked into a high-temperature trajectory from which it will be impossible to escape.
Green growth scenarios maintain high levels of energy use in high-income countries by constraining energy use, and therefore development, in the Global South — in some cases to levels that are below what is required for even basic needs. Yes, we need renewable energy transition. But needlessly high energy use in rich countries means this transition will be slower and the social and ecological costs will be higher.
In sum, green growth scenarios play loose with science, assume incredibly unjust arrangements, and gamble with the future of humanity — and all of life on Earth — simply to maintain ever-increasing levels of aggregate output in high-income countries.
_________________________
FULL ESSAY -- https://monthlyreview.org/2023/07/01/on-technology-and-degrowth/
#Science #Environment #Climate #ClimateChange #Capitalism #Degrowth
La rivoluzione elettrica arriva anche in casa Peugeot: la nuova 208 GTi promette scintille!
Dobbiamo ridefinire la mobilità! Ripensare la sostenibilità delle auto è l'unica strada da percorrere. 
️ "Alfa Romeo dice addio alle Giulia e Stelvio a benzina! È l'ora di un futuro eco-friendly.
Il Regno Unito volta pagina: dal 2030 solo strade ecologiche, basta benzina e diesel! 
#FBPE #RejoinEU 
Embracing nuclear energy is key to protecting our planet from disastrous climate change! 
Let's harness the power of the atom to create a sustainable future 
FREE PALESTINE 