[Engaged] Negativity against engaged Buddhism?

[Daitetsu]

Ok anyway - so also climate change and CO2 emission. So George Bush or Trump whomever gets blamed, and it may be justifiable. But here's the thing. The US gets a lot of heat for shit that it's not fully responsible for. Now this is my opinion - and I'm open to correction - so I'm not here waving a placard angrily. just hear me out.

So the reason the US doesn't want to impose more regulation is that even if we do, it incurs significant financial cost, which reduces our ability to compete in the marketplace - where we are significantly hindered already because of our cost to deliver goods and services vs China; further, the main reason is that if countries like China don't do anything or adhere to regulations, we are basically taking ourselves out of being a viable competitor on the world market when they need to do something. Change on our side would be minimal. China needs to step up their game. They literally have the vast majority of humans on the planet. We can be an example, but China doesn't care about that. They do their own thing; they care about their people's interest, just as we do.

I took the freedom to put an important part of this in bold characters.
You wrote the impact would be minimal, but the truth is that the US ranks number 2 worldwide when it comes to absolute CO2 emissions - even before India that has lots of more people. To think the more people the more CO2 emissions is wrong.
If you take a look at the CO2 emission per capita you see why: The per capita CO2 emissions of the US is about 2.5 higher than that of China. US number 3, China number 12.
It has also something to do with the degree of industrialization and lifestyle.

These numbers are from 2016:

[table]
 [tr]
[th]Rank[/th]         [th]Country[/th]	[th]Total emissions from fuel combustion[/th]	[th]Per capita emissions from fuel combustion[/th][/tr]

[tr][td]1[/td]	[td]China[/td]	                     [td]9056.8MT[/td]                          [td]6.4T[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]2[/td]	[td]United States[/td]	     [td]4833.1MT[/td]	                      [td]15.0T[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]3[/td]	[td]India[/td]	                      [td]2076.8MT[/td]                     	[td]1.6T[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]4[/td]	[td]Russian Federation[/td]      [td]1438.6MT[/td]	                [td]9.9T[/td][/tr]
[tr][td]5[/td]	[td]Japan[/td]	                     [td]1147.1MT[/td]	                       [td] 9.0T[/td][/tr][/table]

(Source: https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/eac...-co2-emissions)

A friend of mine recently said: "The US and China are by far the worst polluters, let them begin taking measures." (FYI: I live in Germany, number 6 on the list, really bad considering how small our country is)
So the US says "let China take steps first", China says "let the US begin", and all the others say "let the biggest players begin".
If everyone thinks that way, nothing will happen though.

Another argument one hears a lot recently is what you also wrote above: "ability to compete in the marketplace"
However, if we carry on with doing business as usual there won't be a marketplace in the long run. It won't make much sense any more if the planet is not habitable for human life anymore.
We cannot eat or breathe money.

Our governments behave like someone who is in a burning house but refuses to use the fire extinguisher because he/she does not want to ruin his/her flatscreen TV with all the water.

The source of this thinking is that a lot of people simply don't know the numbers. They think "It's not that bad as they say in the media."
No, it is not that bad - it's worse.
Over decades the oil industry has spent hundreds of millions of Dollars every year (!) for campaigns that give the public a false image. Watering down facts and numbers. Just to make profit.
Governments don't do enough, because they just think about re-election and don't want to make unpopular decisions.



=====================


I don't think everyone needs to be an "Engaged Buddhist" (after all just another category that separates), and I would not call myself an Engaged Buddhist, since I don't like to put labels on things/people.
However, it is absolutely compatible on an individual basis to incorporate in one's practice. To use it even as a foundation for one's practice.
With our way of life humanity has violated the First Precept to the highest possible extent. In order to avoid doing harm we must treat our world better. There is no Earth 2.0 within our reach.

I try to do my best to have a small CO2 footprint - not because I am Buddhist, but because I see it as my moral obligation as a human being.


Buddhist practice, however, can give us the strength, means and foundation to act.

Gassho,

Daitetsu

#sat2day

[Risho]

Assuming of course climate change is occurring due to humans

Gassho

Rish
-stlah

[Daitetsu]

Assuming of course climate change is occurring due to humans

It is not an assumption, it is a fact.

A quote by the Union of Concerned Scientists:

The scientific consensus is clear. Building on two previous studies, a landmark 2013 peer-reviewed study evaluated 10,306 scientists to confirm that over 97 percent climate scientists agree, and over 97 percent of scientific articles find that global warming is real and largely caused by humans.
A more recent peer-reviewed paper examined existing studies on consensus in climate research, and concluded that the 97 percent estimate is robust.
This level of consensus is equivalent to the level of agreement among scientists that smoking causes cancer – a statement that very few people, if any, contest today.

(Source: Scientists Agree: Global Warming is Happening and Humans are the Primary Cause)


That some people doubt that humans are responsible is a result of the campaigns launched by oil companies that I mentioned in my above post.

The five biggest oil and gas companies, and their industry groups, have spent at least €251m (£217m) lobbying the European Union over climate policies since 2010, research has revealed.
[ ... ]
The report says the lobbying has succeeded in watering down EU climate legislation. Lobbying, it says, peaks at times when legislation is being drawn up. The oil and gas companies, and their industry groups had high spending in 2014 during the discussions over the EU’s 2030 climate targets, when they spent €34.3m on lobbying the EU institutions.

The report says the climate targets were weakened as a result; they included no binding energy savings target and included a “woefully inadequate” renewable energy target.

Source: Fossil fuel big five 'spent €251m lobbying EU' since 2010


Another quote from UCS:

The George W. Bush administration consistently sought to undermine the public’s understanding of the view held by the vast majority of climate scientists that human-caused emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases are making a discernible contribution to global warming.

More about that here: Climate Change Research Distorted and Suppressed


Gassho,

Daitetsu

#sat2day

[Shonin Risa Bear]

Shitou Xiqian had a very low carbon footprint.

gassho
doyu sat today

[Risho]

I could be on the wrong side of history here - but I'm suspicious; we've heard the sky is falling repeatedly throughout our history.

We aren't even aware of all the changes and cause of changes in our environment and ecosystem.

Things we think we know, we don't know.

Gassho

Rish
-stlah

[Risho]

Shitou Xiqian had a very low carbon footprint.

gassho
doyu sat today

hahahhahahahah that's true!

[Jakuden]

I usually direct folks to Nasa's page as they put it in terms that are easier for non-scientists to understand. If everyone had said, "uh, I dunno if I believe you guys" we would not have put people on the moon. Although, of course the conspiracy theorists do not believe that happened either.

It only takes a few Scientists to agree enough to put this amazing technology in our hands that we use to talk to each other across the world, to put satellites in orbit that can pinpoint our exact location to the second to give us GPS, to increase our current survival rates from diseases and even increase our lifespans drastically from what they were just a few decades ago... but when pretty much all of them get together and say we are causing climate change, let's take the risk and tell them they need more proof? And the frustrating thing is that it isn't even complicated Science, it's just basic. Although they can track it to pretty sophisticated levels now too, if one is interested enough to educate themselves on the details.

https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

Gassho,
Jakuden
SatToday/LAH

[Risho]

Yeah I get it - but the "experts" have led us down false paths since the beginning of time. The "experts" tell us eating meat causes cancer, saturated fat and cholesterol are bad when they are in fact protective, that you need to eat a certain amount of portions or calories to lose weight (the cal in/out hypothesis), that taking a statin to lower cholesterol is good even though statin drugs are very harmful and have never been scientifically proven to help reduce cardiovascular events and have been correlated in an increase in dementia, and the same "experts" that tell their diabetic patients to make sure they eat enough carbs even when carbs are what causes the pancrease to release the most insulin.

I know I'm switching topics to nutrition, but this is the same case where the purported "experts" who tow the company line do not know anything when it comes to human nutrition.

So forgive me if I'm suspicious of experts that claim the world is ending; but of course I could be wrong

Gassho

Rish
-stlay

[Jakuden]

I think, sadly, the real problem is that everyone on the internet sounds like an "expert," so when there is real information there, the average person doesn't know how to discern fact from opinion. Unfortunately the solution to that is to rigorously incorporate education about this in school curricula, especially now in the age of the internet where someone can find pretty much any argument backed up by an "expert" that black is white and vice versa. If one is armed with the knowlege of how to find real facts and interpret them, then they can go right to the study information itself and see, for example, where current medical recommendations are generated.... there is a huge difference in conclusions that can be drawn based on number of studies, size of studies, types of methods used to study, etc. etc.

A lot of those medical recommendations, for example, were perceived as "expert opinions" given all the hype in the media but at least in my case, my doctors actually come out and tell me "I base this medication recommendation on one study, so it may change in the future." Scientists naturally take into account degree of doubt in their conclusions, where to everyone else it is just a sea of "expert opinion."

Gassho,
Jakuden
SatToday/LAH

[Kokuu]

Assuming of course climate change is occurring due to humans

Hi Risho

It isn't an assumption but based on data and knowing the mechanism by which warming occurs.

Given that we know that increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere causes higher global temperatures and the mechanism by which this happens, and that human activity has been releasing more and more CO2 in the past century, it is not even a particularly hard problem to understand why temperatures are rising in accordance with carbon dioxide levels.

In my experience, raising doubts over the credibility of man-made global warming tends to come more from worries about the political implications of the fact that economic activity and environmental harm may be linked, something which is admittedly much easier for the left to accept and fundamentally challenges ideas around free-market economics.

Given this, discussions of the science tend to be pointless but, in terms of engaged practice, it does not matter. For some people, environmental activism will form part of their practice and for others it will not. This is fine. I don't think it is for us to determine the political views of Treeleaf members or what aspects of society most concern them. For me, the importance of Engaged Buddhism is in the making our practice bigger than just ourselves. It does not have to adhere to any political colour or philosophy but does, I believe, require stepping outside of our own lives and acting with kindness and generosity to others in society in some way that accords with our bodhisattva vow. That can be to help at a food bank, supporting veterans, picking up litter in a local park or city centre, volunteering at an animal shelter or whatever works for you. This is not about politics but about helping sentient beings in a demonstrable way.

At Treeleaf we have historically firmly encouraged engaged action to be part of our practice and designated days and weeks in which we set aside time to do just that. Even those of us who are physically unable to do many kinds of volunteer work have found ways of doing this.

Maybe we could focus on what kind of engaged action we would be willing to undertake rather than the kinds that we disagree with? Or are there objections to making practical ways of helping people part of practice in general? Most of us are willing to spend a considerable amount of time sewing a rakusu, but are we as willing to put ourselves out into the world to make a difference to the lives of sentient beings, even if in just a small way?

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[Risho]

yeah but then why isn't India and China in the lead? They have orders of magnitude more humans all releasing CO2?

[Daitetsu]

yeah but then why isn't India and China in the lead? They have orders of magnitude more humans all releasing CO2?

China is in the lead when it comes to total emissions.
However, in the US the emissions per person is by the factor 2.5 higher than in China, which means the average American person produces more CO2 than the average Chinese person.

Is has something to do with which kind of engergy sources and technologies are used and lifestyle among other things.

More populous countries with some of the highest per capita emissions – and therefore high total emissions – are the United States, Australia, and Canada. Australia has an average per capita footprint of 17 tonnes, followed by the US at 16.2 tonnes, and Canada at 15.6 tonnes.

This is more than 3 times higher than the global average, which in 2017 was 4.8 tonnes per person.

Since there is such a strong relationship between income and per capita CO2 emissions, we’d expect this to be the case: that countries with high standards of living would have a high carbon footprint. But what becomes clear is that there can be large differences in per capita emissions, even between countries with similar standards of living. Many countries across Europe, for example, have much lower emissions than the US, Canada or Australia.

(Source: Where in the world do people emit the most CO2?)



Gassho,

Daitetsu

#sat2day

[Jakuden]

yeah but then why isn't India and China in the lead? They have orders of magnitude more humans all releasing CO2?

I think Daitetsu answered that question above! If you are truly interested in learning more about this topic, there are some good links posted here in the thread now... otherwise, Kokuu’s advice about finding an engaged activity that meshes with your own practice is great. For those who have chosen Mahayana Buddhist practice such as Zen, engaged activity is important, no matter how small or large. It is time to sit with what has been said and for each of us to make our own decisions about what activities to pursue, and which to leave to others.

Gassho
Jakuden
SatToday/LAH


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Kokuu]

For those who have chosen Mahayana Buddhist practice such as Zen, engaged activity is important, no matter how small or large. It is time to sit with what has been said and for each of us to make our own decisions about what activities to pursue, and which to leave to others.

[krissydear]

For those who have chosen Mahayana Buddhist practice such as Zen, engaged activity is important, no matter how small or large. It is time to sit with what has been said and for each of us to make our own decisions about what activities to pursue, and which to leave to others.

Gassho
krissy
SToday/lah