What can be done to prevent more dangerous heatwaves in Europe?

Does Europe need to plant more trees in it’s cities?

It appears that Europe does many things right for sustainability and climate change - public transit over cars, recycling, reducing carbon footprint better compared to other parts of the world. Of course all communities can do better at reducing their carbon footprint - Is this America’s fault with their carbon footprint that Europe is suffering? America has their cars, and simply cranks up their Air conditioners when it’s hot.

What else is there to do? I thought China had success improving their renewable energy output, even though they are still polluters, is it the actions of China and the USA causing misery in Europe? How do we help Europeans suffering and prevent this from happening again?

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    37 minutes ago

    That’s the thing about climate change.

    One place can do everything right…if the other countries in the world doesn’t do the same everyone is fucked regardless.

  • zlatiah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    35 minutes ago

    Methinks this needs policy-level changes. There’s only so much we can do individually at this point

    Immediate terms: There’s nothing that can be done to curb the heatwave IMO, but there are ways to prevent danger. Namely, AC, cooling centers, public education on preventing heat-related injuries/deaths… Maybe govts can even temporarily reduce regulations/give subsidies on split-systems to help nudge some folks, but nothing much else can be done. One pet-idea I have is cooling centers, since I know Houston (which has extreme weathers) opens cooling/warming centers when the weather is too extreme; it is a very progressive implementation that benefits those who are underprivileged

    Slightly longer term: Trees/green spaces always help. Public transit systems always help. Some fairly sweeping changes in climate-related regulation (ease AC regulations, tighten car regulations, tax on pollution, etc), aimed at both reducing danger and improving the climate… or at least recuperate some “pollution tax” so the govt can use the money to plant more trees and build more trains. Also some European countries can do so much better at discouraging car use (or at least switch to EVs) given how good the train networks are; for countries without good train networks, build some

    Even longer term: Massive investments in green energy; if they are investing already, invest more. But be practical… temporary solutions like nuclear are not everyone’s cup of tea but they help with the transition. Do better on international collaboration. Find ways to discourage international trading partners from over-polluting (probably a combination of tariffs and negotiations… not my specialty).

    Obligatory not an economist/political scientist, there are probably better ways to implement these than what I suggested

    • BigTwerp@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 minutes ago

      Your last point should be first. Europe (and the UK) are reducing their carbon output but our success is dwarfed by the increase in co2 output by China and India. The US has also made no effort to reduce emissions but because industry there is declining it hasn’t increased for a few years. We need to apply a carbon tax to imports from those countries.

  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    europe needs to invest in ACs, apparently the continent temperatures rises alot faster than other continents as for an immediate solution, long term, they need to accelerate into green energy.

  • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 hours ago

    It appears that Europe does many things right for sustainability and climate change - public transit over cars, recycling, reducing carbon footprint better compared to other parts of the world.

    No. It wasn’t enough by far

    There have been many right ideas, but what has actually been done was only a tiny little change, not significant.

      • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        Stop burning things (oil, gas, …).
        (Stop does not mean reduce by 3%)

        Stop producing and buying so many animals for food.

        Grow new woods (real large, not tiny).

  • susi7802@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    According to the UN and other organizations: To PREVENT the heatwaves, it is crucial that the amount of CO2 released globally is reduced. All nations need to tighten laws to lower CO2 production. This means you need to VOTE for the right party. To MITIGATE the effects of the heatwaves, countries can do many things: plant trees in towns (as they lower temperatures due to evaporation and shade), improve architecture etc. That may not help too much though, as the intensity and length of the heatwaves will continue to increase over the next decades. So reduction of CO2 released is the best bet.

    • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I already abstain from beef for environmental reasons. And limit my dairy too.

      I heard that the local nut farms in my region consume a lot of ground water. and the majority of their sales are abroad, so I try to eat less nuts now too. I don’t want to support nut farms in my area that majority focus on selling abroad or to far away places, because us locals need that ground water more than their profits.

  • bagsy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 hours ago

    nothing, nothing we do now will stop the warming. if we end all fossil fuel burning, concrete production, and livestock production tomorrow, the atmosphere will continue to warm for hundreds of years before peaking. We are cooked. Grab your popcorn.

    • GreenBeard@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 hours ago

      This. What part of “well past the tipping point” do people not understand? The time to take drastic action was 20 years ago. It’s “adapt or die” time. The good news is, the elderly are more vulnerable so that should help with the population decline issue.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Sorry. But this comment made me think of this:

      Anyway? We’re fucked and the game now is to mitigate and adapt.

  • CapuccinoCoretto@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    End all fossil fuel use asap and make trade blocks that prefer countries that do the same. Tarrifs for those that use dirty fuels beyond the Eurobloc’s schedule.

    Remember, even if we stopped today, there is a 20 year lag time so it’s getting way, way worse.

    https://www.iea.org/energy-system/fossil-fuels#tracking

    We are still growing fossil fuel use. The repercussions are enormous, and effectively, permanent.

  • Cousin Mose@lemmy.hogru.ch
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Wouldn’t simply addressing climate change generally be the answer? I don’t understand why this might be confusing.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Because billionaires make that impossible.

      The CEO of starbucks lives in LA. The HQ of starbucks is in Seattle.

      He COULD move the HQ to LA. He COULD buy a 2nd house in Seattle.

      Instead he takes his own personal commercial jet DAILY from LA to Seattle, and back again. Every day.

      There is a commercial jet that flies the skies, using up fuel, and burning through the atmosphere 365 days a year.

      All because this fuckwit doesn’t want to have a ZOOM meeting.

      That’s one billionaire. One. Now think of the fact that 1 billionaire on average creates more environmental damage than 1 million regular people combined.

      And that’s ONE. Now think of all the billionaires in the world. Combined.

      And then there’s America. I live in America. If I need something from the store, I’ll walk. Yeah, it may be a 15 minute walk. Each way. But, c’mon. It’s not that far. By the time you look for your keys, and open the garage, and start the car, and everything, you’re looking at 5-10 minutes anyways. May as well just walk. I got a little wagon I use to carry all my groceries. It handles 750lbs.

      Now, every car on the road, doing these short little trips. It feels like not much, but it adds up.

      On top of all that, I have a theory that paved surfaces retain natural heat, and in the case of black tar surfaces, RAISE the heat.

      As opposed to grass, which would lower it.

      But billionaire or middle class, nobody wants to give up their ammenities. Even if the planet suffers. Guess we’ll all just die in an inferno.

      • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        should the EU take action against billionaires or the US to address climate change? I suppose they could impose sanctions, fines, or something to save EU lives?

        • Hell_nah_brother@thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Lemme tell you man, i don’t think you can sound more impersonal and alien then you are doing now. Yes I would vote to do something about, yes. Maybe some hanging is required.

          • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            Many people seem comfortable with bringing back guillotines, including me. It would be interesting to see the reaction.

        • Semjeza@fedinsfw.app
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Yes, they should.

          Trumo’s threat to impose new, higher, tariffs on EU for starting to legislate against US tech monopolies and support local startups show how it would go.

          But better to put it forwards under the chicken taco and make headway, and then future US leaders (if any) would have to make open moves against environmental measures.

          • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            49 minutes ago

            The EU could take steps towards less dependency of the US (and other continents for that matter)

      • Starya67@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Note that that “1%” isn’t just millionaires and billionaires. Anyone lower middle class and up in the Western world is part of that 1%. People mistakenly think the jet setters are the main polluters. Everyone who isn’t poor in the West is the main polluter.

  • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    It’s a tantalizing idea simply to blame the US for the deteriorating climate in Europe. But that seems both pointless and unjustified. Industrialization and excessive emissions started in Europe. We have gone into debt far enough ourselves in a manner of speaking, we can’t blame the yanks although their government currently is … well, you know.

    Europeans are going to buy air conditioners and they will probably outfit cooling facilities that people can seek refuge from the heat in as a stop gap measure. That’s definitely causing more nuclear waste in France where atom splitting reigns supreme. Although nuclear power generation will suffer when rivers needed for cooling become mere trickles. And for the rest of the continent one can only hope they don’t burn shit to turn turbines to make more power. But it wouldn’t surprise me if they did.

    There is no way to prevent these heatwaves; the damage is already done. If we stopped burning stuff today everywhere, we could prevent them from getting worse. That’s just a very sensible pipe dream unfortunately.

    • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      54 minutes ago

      I was under the impression that Europe’s current carbon footprint was lower than much of the world.

      Nuclear energy is an interesting discussion. I’ve heard the suggestion that it’s one good alternative specifically for now until communities and countries can get better renewable energy alternatives. But people can be so weary due to the low but real risk that things have gone wrong in the past.

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    9 hours ago

    I have generally found the lack of urban trees in Europe pretty shocking. Even in wide open squares where there’s no reason not to have them it’s often just cobblestones. While Europe is certainly cooler than where I live, even so it seems like it would be very hot and unpleasant if the weather gets even a bit warm.

    Some countries like France and the Netherlands are doing some good work on this lately but it needs to be more widespread and unfortunately it will take some time to pay dividends.

    And yes we need to decarbonize more aggressively. It may be a bit painful but less so than the pain of inaction.

  • disregardable@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    The major pollutants are manufacturing, mining, oil and energy production, and animal agriculture. not air conditioners. If we want the rest of the world to stop producing with manufacturing, you’re going to need to create agreements to share your wealth in ways that do not require the exchange of goods. That’s why people over-produce right now. For money. That’s why the world will continue to get hotter for the considerable future. Nobody wants to be the ones to give away our wealth for free. You need to take care of your people and install air conditioners like the rest of the world. Good luck finding somewhere in China without air conditioning.

  • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    What else is there to do?

    Wait.

    We can do things, or we have done things, and then we have to wait until the results happen.

    The current trouble originates from what we have done during the last decades/centuries. Everything we do now will have impact on what we will experience a few decades/centuries later.

    But nothing that we do “now” can change things “now”.

    • robocall@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      I think there’s more that Europe can do besides sit back and wait.

      Since over 1000 people have died, European countries can plan for the next heat wave. Apparently some people have drowned because they swam in areas they didn’t realize were more dangerous than they appeared. Installing informative signs or posting life guards in high traffic areas could save lives at rivers and lakes. That’s just one idea.

      We know the elderly have disproportionately died and they don’t notice the heat as well due to poor blood circulation, so sharing information specifically for seniors in their languages could save lives. There’s still plenty to learn and do now.

      • Zwuzelmaus@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        57 minutes ago

        I said to wait is one more neccessary thing to do before the effects of current actions will become visible.

        I did not say to wait is all we can do!

  • DudeWhoYapsTooMuch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    They’re going have to actually focus on Green based energy instead of relying to America and China and many more other countries to do so.