Social media seems to be laughing its ass off about this tragedy, is it because the folks at burning man are perceived as frivolous hippies or something? Everyone I’ve ever met who was a regular burning man attendee has been a solid human being with strong morals, personally and financially responsible, a career. Upstanding members of society for sure. I guess all some people know is the sensationalized drugs and sex. A person died. This is a tragedy for an event that brings positivity into the world. Kind of annoyed.

  • Battle Masker
    link
    fedilink
    14510 months ago

    aside from the obvious “rich people exploiting the environment with their hippy party that costs $200 for their cheapest tickets,” I saw a video online that brought up a good point that I never considered. The cost of lumber has increased exponentially in the past 3 years alone, jumping to nearly $1700 per 1000 feet at its peak in 2021, but staying between $400 and $600 per 1000 feet in recent months (still high compared to say 10 years ago.) And these people are buying tens of thousands of feet of lumber solely to burn it away in the middle of nowhere where there’s little vegetation to absorb the excess CO2 waste. That, along with the climate change protesters being police brutalized just before the event, really puts a sour taste in people’s mouths. Especially in a time where “once in a lifetime” weather events seem to be back-to-back.

    economic data from: https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/lumber

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1810 months ago

      Tickets cost about 10x that. I was interested back when it was a cool art exchange, freedom event. But SO many people flock to it as a giant party that it’s become restrictive unless your volunteering or bringing an exhibit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        410 months ago

        From old burners I have talked to, the entire experience has completely changed. Alcohol used to be frowned upon, now it’s common place.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      910 months ago

      Sincerely with rocket launches now being a daily thing i’m not very worried by that burning lumber.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        410 months ago

        Rockets mostly use hydrogen as fuel, burning wood is way more polluting than burning hydrogren.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      510 months ago

      Also John Wilson tried to go shoot at the event and after compiling hours of footage was told that he couldn’t use any of it because there was some exclusive licensed coverage provider for the event.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      310 months ago

      And these people are buying tens of thousands of feet of lumber solely to burn it away in the middle of nowhere where there’s little vegetation to absorb the excess CO2 waste.

      That’s not really how plants work.

      Photosynthesis turns co2 + water into sugar + oxygen. Cellular respiration turns sugar + oxygen into co2 + water.

      The total co2 absorbed by a plant is exactly equal to the amount of co2 used to make all the sugar, cellulose, etc. the plant currently has. Digestion, decomposition, fires etc. undo that.

      A mature forest or lawn is carbon neutral: new growth is balanced out by decomposition of old growth.

      Distance to plants doesn’t matter. What matters is if and how the trees they’re burning are being replanted or replaced. .

      • Battle Masker
        link
        fedilink
        310 months ago

        Thanks for the correction. That helps me better understand how counteracting pollution works

    • @[email protected]
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      210 months ago

      Yesterday in the US it was labour day, 100 of millions of Americans has a BBQ many using coal and wood the impact of burning man is insignificant in comparison

      • Scribbd
        link
        fedilink
        12
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        What are fossil fuels other than captured carbon from plants and animals from long ago?

        Rereleasing carbon is the problem now. Wood being sustainable needs a non-surplus in carbon emissions to begin with.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          810 months ago

          Everything is “carbon neutral” on a long enough timescale. One of many reasons why that expression is 100% unadulterated bollocks. If you’re an airline, you can’t just offset the damage you do by paying a Bangladeshi farmer two dollars to throw some tree seeds on the ground.

          • Scribbd
            link
            fedilink
            410 months ago

            Burning man should become Burried man. Everybody should dig a hole and burry the wood. That is carbon capture.

            I am not an expert. So this could just be a naive take. I wouldn’t be surprised burying wood actually amplifies the carbon emissions due to some reactions with soil, or something.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              410 months ago

              I would think the biggest pollutant there would be all the fuel.

              Getting there and back (and the location could be charitably described as the arse end of nowhere), all the rented RVs with the air con running… Burning a wooden effigy wouldn’t even come close.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              410 months ago

              I mean, decomposition releases methane over time, slower than burning does, but buried wood in the desert is more likely to petrify than rot. There’s a lot to be said for burying wood in certain situations. Hugelkultur (making agricultural/garden mounds out of wood and soil) if done right can do amazing things (everything from creating microclimates that increase biodiversity to supercharging the soil with beneficial fungi/bacteria, to increasing water retention).