• Nouvellalia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      Did you send the underage bathroom children home? Not only will you have to adjust each one now, you won’t have children to abuse before bed. That’s not very billionaire of you.

  • TheDemonBuer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Do billionaires ask people to save water? I’m not sure most billionaires really care how much water they or anyone else uses. I don’t think most billionaires even pretend to be conservationists.

  • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    That’s still just a drop in the bucket.

    A single almond uses 5 liters of water to grow to harvest. And yet somehow that’s supposed to be more environmentally friendly as a milk alternative.

    They always blame em the consumer instead of having industry be more efficient.

    • Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      You’re joking, right? Dairy Milk requires not just way more water but also space, work and a deeply unethical business concept (cows have to constantly be impregnated to produce milk, the antibiotics they’re given en’ mass are destroying our most important drugs’ effectiveness, the food we give the cows could feed multiple humans, ecetera).

      Almond milk is also the most demanding of the alternatives as far as I know. Oat milk is even more efficient, and other than with cows we can still make farming them more efficient (drip-farming, Solarfarming - crops have higher yields and lower water needs in partial shadow as well - ecetera).

      Not sure where you got your opinion from. There are good alternatives.

  • Ricky Rigatoni@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    This does save water because the water comes out at 1200psi and cleans them in less than a second so only a pint of water is used.

  • Whelks_chance@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    We still should though. We outnumber them hundreds of millions to one.

    Their hypocrisy is a good reason to ignore them. They’re not role models.

  • Zink@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    In the year of our lord 2026, it’s more like they TELL us to save water while standing in that shower making constant eye contact with the camera with water running down their face. And just before their message ends you see a cloud zip past a window behind them because they’re on a private jet while recording it.

  • Grass@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    those people that kayaked to epstein island in a hurricane found out that epstein had a weird building featuring a kitchen with children’s tableware, an office that also kinda looks like a casting couch kinda setup, and one of those kind of showers which had an oily floor.

  • yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    3 days ago

    This is an argument for cynicism and inaction. And it’s servile boot-licking to insist that wealthy people should set moral cultural standards for the rest of us.

    • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      3 days ago

      I live in the southwest US, water saving measures for households are basically as good as they can get without asking people to stop bathing every day. And really it’s not household use (even wasteful household use) here that threatens aquifers, it’s relentless pumping of ground water and overuse of river water for agriculture. In California in particular this is tied up with water rights that allow farmers to use excessive amounts of water with minimal or no cost associated with it. Not all of what’s grown is even a food product either, ex alfalfa.

      Obviously we need farms and food, but we have to modernize how plants are watered to minimize water loss. Drip irrigation is much more effective, but since it costs more money than just flooding a ditch many farmers don’t bother.

      • rafoix@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Isn’t CA craziest water user the almond industry? Other than data center bullshit.

        • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          Household use is 5 million acre feet/ year in CA. Almond use is 6.8 million acre feet. Alfalfa and other crops to feed cattle is about 8 million acre feet.

          An acre foot is 325,851 gallons, or how much water it takes to cover an acre in a foot of water.

        • Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          As long as animal agriculture exists in the state that’ll pretty much always be a bigger water user. But they’re not low water plants for sure.

    • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s just calling out hypocrisy… It’s not making a claim that others shouldn’t engage in conservation just because billionaires won’t.