I've encountered the term "Imperial mode of living" cited by Kohei Salto. Thanks for posting this interview.
On the theft of resources for the affluent lifestyle, I recommend Cobalt Red, about mining in the DRC. It's a brutal read. Kids digging with hand tools in toxic pits for $1 a day.
May 1st colour being red is a nice subtle touch.
All profit is stolen wages.
Or, proper running water systems vs having to buy plastic jugs of water.
Certainly the formula can be sharpened but it's a decent heuristic for thinking about impact.
I = PAT
Impact is equal to population times affluence times technology.
Decreasing human population can help to decrease impact, as long as the smaller population doesn't disproportionately increase its resource use (affluence x technology)
Sky burial for me please.
I've been trying to find clothing made in my overdeveloped country. Though the only textile we make here is wool, maybe linen, it's a way to support labour practices that are not sweatshops.
Still learning more names of species that live here. I'm starting to spot some trees quicker. ID'd all the trees around my apartment.
Edit: also found local farms to get a good chunk of produce from. Food miles don't matter as much as people believe, but strong rural economies do: less likely to turn into exurbs, and less of my money going to supermarket extortionists.
It's a dictatorship that just did some ethnic cleansing. COP29 is going to be an absolute joke.
As are the Dems. Well, they at least slap a rainbow sticker on the oil rigs.
Hydrogen: the crypto of green energy.
Most climate scientists say we need to make changes to our personal lives and changes to the system. If one lives in the overdeveloped world, one's impact is potentially huge. There are basic things that make a difference: eat less meat from ruminants (beef, mutton), don't fly, have fewer or no kids. Those are low hanging fruit, take little effort, and still leave time and energy for whatever system change tactic one wants to do.