Caring for nature with that car??

If you have read through my posts and pages, you may know that I drive a not to small 4 wheel drive, which is prepared for going off road, as well as a motorcycle. And if you haven't realised by now that I am trying to change something in my life in order to do more for the conservation of wildlife and nature, you haven't read anything of what's on this site.
But how can that be? Big car, bike, polluting the air, using fossil fuel and caring for nature????
The question is obvious, of course.
Let me try to give an answer.

For starters: I do not believe wildlife and nature conservation on the scale the world needs it will come from limiting people's mobility, increasing oil prizes, so called green zones where only certain types of motorised vehicles are allowed, or, god(esse)s forbid, the most ridiculous of all measures, taxes on CO2.
All these political hype measures will never lead to a healthier nature. 
To give you an idea of what I mean: Politicians are trying desperately to get the western world to replace all their fossil fuel cars with electric cars, because that is "clean". What they completely ignore is the fact that we do not have the technology to produce these cars without blasting an amount of CO2 per produced car into the atmosphere for which my car can run on diesel for the next 5 to 10 years (depending on calculation model), we do not have the technology to provide all these cars with "clean" energy (and please ignore the crap arguments that nuclear power is clean because the half-life of the nuclear waste is "only" a couple of thousand years), we do not have any alternatives for the amounts of raw materials needed for the production of batteries and we do not have the technology to dispose of batteries at the end of their life in an environmentally friendly way. When you sum that all up, and compare my car, which is 18 years old at the moment, has run a little less than 300.000km and does not need a new car to replace it for the next 15 to 20 years and another 300.000km, the environmental odds, in my opinion, are in favour of my car. Which is why I keep it.
As for taxes on CO2. Do you know of any company that has actively reduced the amount of CO2 it produces because of the costs (taxes) of CO2? I don't. All that's happened is that companies having to pay have increased prices of their products (with in the end you and me paying for their CO2 production) and/or have stepped into the trade of CO2 volumes with companies that produce way below their limits. A trade, by the way, that is making a lot of money for some but is not helping nature in any way.

So what do I think will help nature?
In the end, I think it all boils down to technology. But there are two main areas where I think we should act.
First, there is our consumption pattern. That's a bit vague, but I mean two types of consumption especially. First our consumption of meat. Human consumption of cheap meat definitely needs to be reduced. I don't really want to scare the hell out of you, but did you know that since 2021, the green lung of the earth is dead? Scientists found in 2021 that the Amazonas, the last stronghold of unspoilt nature and one of the last hopes for clean air and the sequestration of CO2, is producing more CO2 than it sequesters. The cause: destruction of forests for the benefit of the meat industry. Huge areas have been and are being burned down to create areas for cattle. Burning of trees sets huge amounts of CO2 free, cattle produces huge amounts of CO2 and with not enough forest left to absorb all this CO2, man has destroyed what once was one of our biggest allies in the fight against climate change.
Second our consumption of natural materials where we have good alternatives. This is a more difficult one. Example: the amount of cotton we need, and the areas needed to grow cotton, are becoming more and more an environmental problem. Have you ever tried a T-shirt made with bamboo? Bamboo can be used very well in a lot of textiles, grows extremely fast and its processing for garments needs a minimal amount of water compared to cotton. There are lots of other examples, but I don't want to go too deep into the subject here.
So that was consumption patterns as the first area where we should act.
The second one is technology.
We must start to invest a hell of.a lot more than we do now in technology that will benefit our environment. The easiest example: if we had set our brilliant minds to and had invested in the technology needed to produce cars without producing CO2, the technology to store energy without digging tons of Lithium out of the earth, the technology to generate/win enough really "clean" energy and the technology to reduce any waste at the end-of-life of cars to zero, I would have traded my car in a long time ago.
Impossible? Extremely difficult? Needs many years to develop? Bullshit!! Politicians, large industries and banks simply don't want to. And that is the real problem we are facing.
Germany alone has decided to invest over a 100 billion Euros in its army, after the war in the Ukraine scared our politicians to death. It is 100 billion wasted. If we invested this money in new technologies that support the environment, we would help the country and the future of our children and grandchildren a lot more. We could use it to develop better technology for wind- and water-energy that is so efficient we can really do without buying nuclear energy abroad. We could use it to develop the technology to produce double the amount of food on half the area we currently need. We could use it to develop synthetic building materials, leaving us almost independent of wood, sand and metals, And, and, and. 
But apparently, investing in the technology to kill hundreds of people from a safe distance is a lot sexier.

Yes, I know. My car uses a lot of diesel. And my neighbour's hobby of driving his truck with two motorcycles to the motocross every weekend to go crossing with his son isn't very environmentally friendly. And a friend who takes the car to go visit family because public transport isn't as convenient can also be pointed a finger at.
But limiting people in their mobility, forbidding them to do things they like, to enjoy their personal piece of freedom, is not the right way in my opinion. Forbidding things never is the right way. Convincing people that doing things differently is just as much fun and just as good, but better for the environment, is the only way to go.
Let people have their cars, their motocross, their entertainment and their meat. But let's convince them to not overdo it and to not take it for granted. And let's convince them that if we do not influence politicians and large industries into concentrating on the need to change the real big problems, rather than focus on smaller problems, on the need to invest into technology that benefits the environment rather than technology that serves destruction, it will soon be over with the fun for all of us.

---