5 ms·
Why is "bold action" required? This entire concept seems flawed to me.
by nv-vn 8y ago
Why is "bold action" required? This entire concept seems flawed to me.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoRun away climate change caused by global CO2 emissions?
- nv-vn 8y agoAnd how is California going to reverse that exactly? Even if this happened on a federal level, most houses would still be using fossil fuels and most of the world wouldn't even bat an eye.
- toomuchtodo 8y agoYou continue to incentivize the generation and consumption of renewables until you’ve put fossil generation in a position where it’s no longer profitable to operate, thereby accelerating the transition to renewables and storage? It’s pretty straightforward. A single actor acting alone doesn’t solve the problem, everyone taking small actions does.
- 15155 8y agoThe same way California apparently solved the cancer-causing components issue: by feel-good edict.
- fjsolwmv 8y agoCalifornia didn't mandate material changes, just stupid labels.
- acdha 8y agoThe same way California moved the entire world forward on car emissions. LA smog used to be so bad you couldn’t see the other side of the street, reactionaries predicted that doing anything would destroy the economy, but they wrote laws requiring cleaner cars anyway. Since everyone wanted to sell to California, they did the R&D to make it work and eventually economics won out against the cost of making different models for different states. The economy was destroyed right into being the 5th largest in the world. This takes a ton of usage away from conventional power and more importantly it tells multiple industries it’s safe to make big investments because California will buy your solar panels, build your designs, etc. Everyone benefits directly from those economies of scale and research investments and indirectly from being able to pass similar laws in their states when it turns out not to wreck California.