4 ms·

>Even if they are wrong, why would we take the chance Because the economic consequences of fossil fuel regulation could be massively deadly or at least disrupt

>Even if they are wrong, why would we take the chance Because the economic consequences of fossil fuel regulation could be massively deadly or at least disruptive as well, that is why people and companies spend millions of dollars lying about it. The balance of power of nations and corporations would be totally upended.

Brakenshire 9y ago
> The balance of power of nations and corporations would be totally upended. Most of these "skeptics" (accepting a very loose meaning of the word) are in the US, and given the US's massive geographical resources, of desert, planes and coastline, and its expertise in technology development, I can't see why it as a nation would object, in terms of a zero sum transfer of power between nations. The really dramatic shift would be away from the Middle East, in particular Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran, and I struggle to see why the US should do anything except cheer that.
duozerk 9y ago
Exactly. And the very act of stopping most fossil fuel use may result in a very fast increase of warming because of the diminution of global dimming - although how much (and wether or not it's significant) is highly debatable - could be nothing, could be a straight up +1C in a few weeks. And as you said, stopping the fossil fuel use worldwide would upend our entire modern civilization, result in massive food shortages and an economic crisis, and likely significant conflicts as well. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
tankenmate 9y ago
Some nations however are looking ahead, look at Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Morocco in the past hasn't been a major source of fuel, however they are now creating huge solar farms and planning to export power to Spain (and the rest of Europe). And Saudi Arabia are pumping huge amounts of money in to solar farms and are home to some of the cheapest solar farms in the world, subsidy floor prices are low as 1.79 US cents per kWh according to offers for tender this month. [0] [0] https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/world-s-cheapest-prices-submitted-for-saudi-arabia-s-first-solar-project-1.663842 https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/world-s-cheapest-...
epistasis 9y ago
We’re headed that direction anyway as the tech curves for wind solar and storage mean that fossil fuel energy generation is likely to be more expensive in 15-20 years. We could have gotten here sooner if we had invested more heavily, sooner in these technologies. As it is we had a few forward thinking states like Germany to thank for where we are, with spot prices of wind and most solar being cheaper than coal, and often cheaper than natural gas. This totally upends the few existing players that were once thought to have unassailable power. But now that companies that are heavily invested in natural gas are treating coal as their competitor and enemy in the political landscape, things are changing. Those natural gas heavy fossil fuel companies are actually asking for a carbon tax! As solar and wind become bigger economic forces, we will likely start to see more consolidation and see fewer player with stronger political force to compete with natural gas. The nuclear industry has no power here, they let fossil fuel driven companies control their fate, and they have no industrial savvy to build an industry, and instead spend all their time tilting at windmills of weak political forces, and unable to build and deliver reactors when they do have eager customers. It will be super interesting to see what happens with Perry’s coal NOPR that’s being evaluated by FERC right now. Has FERC been stacked with enough coal partisans, or will the rest of the energy industry win out?

Brakenshire 9y ago

> The balance of power of nations and corporations would be totally upended. Most of these "skeptics" (accepting a very loose meaning of the word) are in the US, and given the US's massive geographical resources, of desert, planes and coastline, and its expertise in technology development, I can't see why it as a nation would object, in terms of a zero sum transfer of power between nations. The really dramatic shift would be away from the Middle East, in particular Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Iran, and I struggle to see why the US should do anything except cheer that.

duozerk 9y ago

Exactly. And the very act of stopping most fossil fuel use may result in a very fast increase of warming because of the diminution of global dimming - although how much (and wether or not it's significant) is highly debatable - could be nothing, could be a straight up +1C in a few weeks. And as you said, stopping the fossil fuel use worldwide would upend our entire modern civilization, result in massive food shortages and an economic crisis, and likely significant conflicts as well. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

tankenmate 9y ago

Some nations however are looking ahead, look at Morocco and Saudi Arabia. Morocco in the past hasn't been a major source of fuel, however they are now creating huge solar farms and planning to export power to Spain (and the rest of Europe). And Saudi Arabia are pumping huge amounts of money in to solar farms and are home to some of the cheapest solar farms in the world, subsidy floor prices are low as 1.79 US cents per kWh according to offers for tender this month. [0] [0] https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/world-s-cheapest-prices-submitted-for-saudi-arabia-s-first-solar-project-1.663842 https://www.thenational.ae/business/energy/world-s-cheapest-...

epistasis 9y ago

We’re headed that direction anyway as the tech curves for wind solar and storage mean that fossil fuel energy generation is likely to be more expensive in 15-20 years. We could have gotten here sooner if we had invested more heavily, sooner in these technologies. As it is we had a few forward thinking states like Germany to thank for where we are, with spot prices of wind and most solar being cheaper than coal, and often cheaper than natural gas. This totally upends the few existing players that were once thought to have unassailable power. But now that companies that are heavily invested in natural gas are treating coal as their competitor and enemy in the political landscape, things are changing. Those natural gas heavy fossil fuel companies are actually asking for a carbon tax! As solar and wind become bigger economic forces, we will likely start to see more consolidation and see fewer player with stronger political force to compete with natural gas. The nuclear industry has no power here, they let fossil fuel driven companies control their fate, and they have no industrial savvy to build an industry, and instead spend all their time tilting at windmills of weak political forces, and unable to build and deliver reactors when they do have eager customers. It will be super interesting to see what happens with Perry’s coal NOPR that’s being evaluated by FERC right now. Has FERC been stacked with enough coal partisans, or will the rest of the energy industry win out?