> It is also very unpopular to tell people that they need to change.
Part of the problem is that the things a person can do are almost entirely negligible, compared to industry, or require systematic changes of how housing, cities, and jobs are structured, which isn't something an individual can really influence.
I disagree. The industry is a big emitter of co2 but they obly respond to demand from consumer. The oil industry would not pollute as much if nobody was driving a car or flying. The meat industry would not pollute as much if we weren't eating as much meat. It's a society problem but unfortunately unless you force people to change their habits I don't see this changing.
Lots of people are calling for WFH and legitimization of remoting. Alas, it seems to be a matter of monkey power, and the managers want you to burn tons of fuel to sit your butt in the chains they provide and smell his armpits from a distance.
This is why we need taboo-formation around environmentally damaging behaviors and nurture virtuous aspirations towards environmentally responsible spending.
That is, if it means riding your bike to work, or it is a shift in ostentatious spending, from e.g. square footage to bespoke furniture, keeping up with the joneses can actually be an excellent forcing function.
e.g. new england puritans were (are (?)) famously keeping up with the joneses by not buying flashy, wasteful things.
Similar mindsets - that are environmentally responsible - need to take hold (and can take hold. be that example.)
Whatever a single person does is except for a few cases negligible. The problems arise when a lot of people buy manufactured goods without regard for the consequences. The problems arise when a lot of people consume meat and thus create a huge demand for it. Or think that their own house in some sprawling suburb was always their dream and now they require a car too, because of poor public transport.
People vote for all this with their life choices, by what they consume and literally at the ballot box. Saying otherwise is just a popular way to deny responsibility and the individual need to change.
Part of the problem is that the things a person can do are almost entirely negligible, compared to industry, or require systematic changes of how housing, cities, and jobs are structured, which isn't something an individual can really influence.