Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
From My Cold, Dead, but Still Shaking Hands
“Belief” in “climate change” is a signifier of a vast raft of opinions and stances. Those who “deny” are guilty of ecocide, the primary sin of our time. It supersedes all other sins, because it is existential murder of the broadest sense.
The issue at hand is a Canadian study – of course – advising that people should drink less coffee to combat climate change.
Canadian researchers analyzed coffee’s “contribution to climate change” in a piece published in early January and suggested people moderate their consumption of the popular drink as a part of the solution.
Researchers Luciano Rodrigues Viana, Charles Marty, Jean-François Boucher and Pierre-Luc Dessureault wrote in an analysis published in The Conversation that pollution from preparing coffee was “just the tip of the iceberg.”
“Limiting your contribution to climate change requires an adapted diet, and coffee is no exception. Choosing a mode of coffee preparation that emits less GHGs (greenhouse gases) and moderating your consumption are part of the solution,” the researchers at the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi wrote.
Naturally, people on Twitter responded with pledges to drink more coffee, and that made the perpetually-concerned steam up like a good macchina. It gave them something to be Mad About Online, but it also puts them in a difficult position: knowing this, how can they drink coffee now?
Well, they can drink less! We all have to make sacrifices. Okay, good – but that’s a start, right? You’re going to taper down to nothing, right? Because if coffee contributes to the problem, then the elimination of the coffee trade would go a long way toward solving the problem. So there are two things we need to talk about.
- Heavy taxes on coffee. I mean, heavy. That five-dollar Americano ought to be ten. The extra money can go into a fund that helps other nations transition away from coffee production. Juan Valdez can learn to code! This legislative push should include regulations that discourage new coffee shops, which will confine coffee sales to the large chains that can augment the loss of coffee revenue with other products.
- Transition to coffee substitutes. Chicory and mushroom powder, with added protein from insects, would be healthier and more sustainable. The chains would have the resources to scale up demand, and transition the population to non-harm beverages.
- You need to make your friends and family aware of the global harm caused by coffee. Start with a suggestion – say, did you know that Canadian science says coffee is a contributor to climate change? and see if they change their habits of their own accord. If not, confront them when they serve coffee, and ask why they’re unwilling to take this small step to save the climate. If they continue, decline to visit their home and cut off social contact, because maybe if it’s a choice between coffee and seeing their grandchildren, they’ll come around.
People who have a taste for direct action should consider the following:
Sit-ins at school canteens until everyone is aware of the deleterious effects of coffee production. This may include occupying the kitchen, and adulterating the coffee urns with unpleasant-tasting fluids. This should coincide with educational sessions about the colonialist history of coffee production; how the creamery industry uses white supremacism to occupy the body of Black cups of coffee; how sugared coffee surfaces the trauma of industrialized imperialism in the tropics. Note: this will only be effective in institutions of higher learning, or people who have been instructed at these places.
The difficulty inherent in this process is that the people most likely to agree, i.e., the highly educated, will be the most likely to be working at the place where coffee is solved, adding “false consciousness” to the problems we must overcome.
Putting pressure on Starbucks and Dunkin’ Donuts with protests, including blocking the sidewalk, gluing the locks of doors, and defacement of the paintings and posters inside the stores. Coffee houses have been normalized as societally acceptable, but once they are redefined as spaces where people have to confront the consequences of their choices, they will be seen as dens of iniquity. This will also compel the chains to transition more swiftly to sustainable beverages.
Anyone who does not endorse the ideas above is directly contributing to the death of the planet, and should be treated accordingly. This is an emergency, and there is no time for half-and-half measures.Published in Science & Technology
Perhaps a mental health professional can drum up some business addressing the nexus between guilt and addiction among coffee drinkers.
Dave, I think you’ve spotted an opportunity here. I could see a whole industry springing up to help the woke coffee drinkers wean themselves. Maybe burning incense – oh wait. Or lighting up a joint -on wait. Or flying to Burning Man – oh wait. Or firing up the gas oven to make some of those special brownies – oh wait… Eventually it leads to the harmless Thumb Sucking Therapy.
Yes. And that’s true of so many “causes,” as well as government programs; if a solution is reached, those folks are out of a job. And I think they can’t help but notice that.
That happened a while back.
Vy ahr vee alvees zee batt geyes?
How does that differ from a Pub?
I don’t know if anyone made this point already (I skipped some comments) but any human activity can be said to impact climate change. If we give up everything, and just stand in a pasture all day eating grass, we’re still reducing the plant biomass and therefore the planets ability to capture CO2. It’s simply a matter of scale. That many people doing anything will have an effect.
Nothing will satisfy them other than killing off most of the population. Not themselves, of course. The planet needs them.
Yes, people are pollution. As I commented elsewhere, Thanos is the ideal climate activist.
What you’re saying makes more sense the more you drink. In a pub it’s the other way around.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that!
My son has worked for Starbucks for almost 20 years. Starting as a barista, now running a production line at the factory in Seattle. He’s a Certified Taster, which is the coffee equivalent of a sommelier. When I saw him last October, he was unhappy with the level of training given to baristas; they often didn’t appreciate how easy it was to ruin a cup. There’s an art to doing it right and keeping it coming.
Brian sends me special beans from time to time. I’m lucky, there are several local roasters in Rochester. I get most of my beans from Joe Bean Roasters, with whom I have a little history; the couple that owns it were the first folks married here at Robin Hill, before we even thought of it as a wedding venue. They single-source their coffee, traveling to and working with the farmers, and the beans you buy were roasted the day before. You can tell the difference. Brian was impressed.
The first (and only) time I was ever in a Starbucks was in Denver a few years ago. My wife and I were meeting Kelly Maher from the LadyBrains podcast fame. When I got up to place my order (Kelly’s treat!), I asked if I could have a plain coffee with Sweet & Low and half-and-half. The gal said, “Sure!” No problem with a simple order . . .
And if any of you are ever in Augsburg, the best Kaffee in town is to be found at MAK Kaffee Afrika in Karlsstraße. Part of the reason I say this is selbstverständlich that the owners- Alan and Katrin Mutagwaba- are members in the same Pentacostal church as me, but also that we are unusually demanding in our coffee taste. Get your Tanzanian peaberry from a real Tanzanian or not at all.
If I had the opportunity, that is an experience I would not miss.
I suppose cafes serving hot chocolate or fruit juice would also have been banned, if they had existed at the time.
Although you mention Joseph Smith, Klaus Schwab and confreres also want to control what we peons can say to each other.
The people Joseph Smith was worried about might have been wanting to talk about what an odd person Joseph Smith seemed to be. And the same might be true for Klaus Schwab.
Schwab might find it difficult to stop the people from getting together and talking so his working on taking some measures to make sure to curtail their freedom of speech and make traveling more difficult.
The only drink I’ve ever gotten at a starbucks is the hot chocolate (I had a gift card).
I don’t think I’ve been in one since I worked in downtown Chicago, and that’s been fifteen years.
Dunkin’ Donuts had better joe. Cheaper too. No lip, either.
There is a difference, but with some beans and some of the lighter roasts I think it takes more than one day after the roast for them to be at their best. My sense of taste is not as good as your son’s, though, and is not improving with age.
I don’t about coffee and its effect on the planet, but I can assure you that no one wants to deal with a nicotine and caffeine starved police officer. Sometimes both were needed after some calls to take a moment or two to make Officer Friendly reappear in the middle of a shift.
Unless of course if you want overweight and angry police officers.
When King Charles II of England banned coffeehouses, he also banned shops from selling chocolate, sherbet, and tea. Here is the first paragraph of the proclamation.
Seen on the wall at Stan’s Donuts, Homestead Road, Santa Clara, CA.
When you consider that coffee was taxed the same as beer, which meant it had to be prepared the day before then re-boiled, he might have had a point about their utmost perils.
Another King Charles to be taken to the scaffold . . .
Don’t you think 1 out of 3 is enough?
“There’s nothing those bastards don’t have.”
Thanos was a piker, always calling for half measures!