Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

yanbu t1_j1ih6tg wrote

While I can appreciate her passion for the subject, I think the main points against her are that turning environmentalism into a religion isn’t a good idea. Telling everyone to repent and suffer to appease the climate isn’t really a great way to actually accomplish change.

We need technological solutions that are economically viable and don’t require reducing consumption to actually make reducing climate change sustainable. We’re getting there rapidly between the rise of the electric car, renewable energy becoming cheaper than fossil fuels, and fusion power breakthroughs. Her fire and brimstone approach is counterproductive IMO.

5

Willitical_On_Utube OP t1_j1iks4h wrote

I absolutely agree with you. I actually love her passion and conviction. But her solutions aren't possible, at least not right now. Its annoying to me that no one seems to ask her the importance questions. So you traveled via a sail boat and stopped flying in planes. Do you not see that everyone else literally depend on those things to get back and forth to work, and just ditching those things would cripple the economy. Both sides of the argument are very important, and should be addressed together. My opinion is that the majority of people would use clean energy if they could afford it. Credit checks, down payments, and monthly payments are the problem. I think these are the issues that could benefit tons of people while also helping the planet at the same time. Just imagine if the middle and lower class were all the sudden able to get electric cars. That would be a lot less gas engines in the roads every day. And that would he without banning anything.

1