The United States military is one of the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the world
Entertainment industry. Just look what great lengths sports events do. With like the Olympics and the world cup, you have athletes, viewers and media all around the globe to travel to one country. For the world cup, you have teams travel quite some distances, especially with the last in North America. With something like Formular One, you have each team travel around the globe multiple times a year. You have so much events, where you have quite the amount who travel. And lets not forget, that they don’t produce any value, just entertainment.
And lets not forget, that they don’t produce any value, just entertainment.
I don’t know what weird definition of value you are using. But for a sane definition, this is just wrong.
Wood industry comes to mind.
Worldwide they destroy insane amounts of naturally grown woods, that need decades to grow again, if at all. A catastrophe for the climate.
Most large developed countries with established timber industries plant more trees than they harvest, but it’s close to monoculture, and depending on the type of harvest, they may be permanently removing vital nutrients that aren’t replenished.
Though here can be a counterpoint to that. If they plant new trees to take the spot of the old one, it can be a net positive. Growing trees capture more carbon than grown trees.
Well, they don’t.
(Only in a few countries)
Military Ops.
Their reporting requirements are often reduced out exempt so exact numbers are difficult to pin down, but the US DoD is the single largest consumer of fossil fuels.
When they aren’t flying to kill people they are flying to practice killing people, their terrestrial vehicles weigh significantly more than civilian counterparts, and the intent and practical effects of their munitions is literally destruction.
Probably in the least compared to industrial, but I think Waste. Like landfills and all that.
That’s a hot take. (disclaimer, I work in the waste industry). Without the waste industry, there would still be waste, and the climate would be worse off for it.
Fossil fuels probably, they’re at the source at least.
In terms of carbon dioxide release, which is the major driver of global warming, it’s power generation by a long shot. Transportation is number two, manufacturing is number three. The largest emitter of methane, unsurprisingly, is the agricultural sector (i.e cows).
According to my wife, I’m the largest source of gas
My wife and your wife should fight. You and I must never meet indoors.
You can have a ride in my geo metro. Window rollers are broken, fyi
That’s a really nice source.
The Oil Industry has hid their own climate change data from the public, lobbied to keep other industries dependent on fossil fuels.
When the oil industry saw that oil consumption was going down because of increased energy efficiency and moving away to renewable energy, they promoted use of more plastic, which is mostly made from crude oil.
Also, most fertilizer and pesticides are synthesized from crude oil. The so-called green revolution was entirely dependent on synthetic fertilizer and oil-derived pesticides. We’re literally eating our oil.
Fuck oil companies!
Your link doesn’t exactly support your point.
Studies show that the Green Revolution contributed to widespread eradication of poverty, averted hunger for millions, raised incomes, limited the increase of greenhouse gas emissions, reduced land use for agriculture, and contributed to declines in infant mortality.
I thought we were talking about the climate.
Is more humans on the planet, and all the agricultural and industrial activity needed to support them, good for the climate?
This is a complex question. The obvious suspects are fossile fuels / power generation, but really that they are being consumed in great quantity is the problem. So then you have to evaluate which industry is consuming the most. Even that falls short though because there is a human value per unit power consumed factor to consider. Power consumed for heating homes or feeding people is probably more valuable than power consumed to drive yachts to Tahiti. We need fewer people; specifically rich people.
All industries support other indistries or produce stuff you consume.
You take away the oil industry you suddenly have no diesel for the agricultutal industry. Take away coal and you suddenly cripple the steel industry which just about every thing else is built of.
Thinking that just one industry causes climate destruction and no other useful output is a dead end.