novelexistence t1_irrddan wrote
Capitalism doesn't care where it gets it's energy from.
As long as negative externalities aren't appropriately priced it's a losing battle. WE need negative externalities to be priced for the damage they do to the environment or we're not getting any where.
OriginalCompetitive t1_irrh2m4 wrote
US emissions have already dropped by 20% and are falling fast. EU emissions have dropped by 34%. It’s already well underway.
hopelesslysarcastic t1_irtocuu wrote
I mean…those figures seem pretty insufficient given the state of things, no?
OriginalCompetitive t1_irupexw wrote
Sure. But there’s a big difference between not there yet and “we’re not getting anywhere.”
It also depends on how long you’ve been following climate change. I’m old enough to remember when US emissions were skyrocketing. So it’s quite hopeful to see how much things have changed.
slocingwolf t1_irs6l5h wrote
Prigot Pigot Pigot!!
BreakRaven t1_irvn2wn wrote
> Capitalism doesn't care where it gets it's energy from.
Neither does any economic system on the planet.
PurpEL t1_irusag3 wrote
The cost will come from people, not the rich lizardmen unfortunately. Their kind will remain rich and continue to extract even more. Back to serfdom.
This will only be solved by fusion power
[deleted] t1_irrs20q wrote
[removed]
madewithgarageband t1_irsh161 wrote
As opposed to…stripping the Earth of crude oil and fracking? Or are you proposing we go back to the 1800s
[deleted] t1_irsxb4e wrote
[removed]
madewithgarageband t1_irt1ud0 wrote
Can you list them out? Curious as to why you think oil drilling/burning is less harmful
[deleted] t1_irsypwv wrote
[removed]
Synergythepariah t1_irsi4a1 wrote
Accurate username.
[deleted] t1_irsx888 wrote
[removed]
Frubanoid t1_irs78m2 wrote
In the US mines are required to set aside money for cleanup before they even break ground. So at least there's that.
PurpEL t1_irusdq8 wrote
And then they don't!
fungussa t1_irslsjl wrote
Not at all. Tech has already been developed to fully recycle lithium and solar tech is being developed that won't use any toxic / rare materials. Though more importantly, unlike fossil fuels, renewable tech is not undermining the Earth's capacity to sustain life.
[deleted] t1_irsx73o wrote
[removed]
fungussa t1_irsxkk4 wrote
It's low, on both counts. But all environmental impacts from renewable tech is entirely irrelevant when one considers that the continued use of fossil fuels risks the collapse of modern civilisation.
[deleted] t1_irsy69c wrote
[removed]
fungussa t1_irt0c6p wrote
No. You're just denying the existential risk from the continued burning of fossil fuels.
> JPMorgan Warns of Climate as a Threat to ‘Human Life as We Know It’
DirtyLucinaMain t1_irtxlcm wrote
"Tech is always improving" you're right! Renewables are well on their way to becoming infinitely better than your corporate shill fuck the planet bullshit.
kaminaowner2 t1_irtk4ab wrote
Actually even our strip mines are becoming more green, as machines that once where gas powered are becoming electric. Right now every ton of lithium lets out about a 2 tons of carbon, but that number is both dropping and less than a gas powered vehicle produces in a year. So as long as you drive your EV for 5 plus years yes, it is unapologetically a step in the right direction.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments