3 ms·

Dealing with what and how and at what price? Should we stop poor countries from using fossil fuels which is what they primarily are using right now?

saagarjha 8y ago
> Should we stop poor countries from using fossil fuels which is what they primarily are using right now? I mean, that would one thing we could work on.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  So basically let them starve and freeze so you can feel better about yourself? Or what's your solution exactly?
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    > So basically let them starve and freeze so you can feel better about yourself? This is a strawman argument, and you know it. The rest of the world is hard at work trying to come up with better ways to meet energy needs that have a smaller impact on our climate.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      No it was a question and you havent answered it. How do we do that?
      - saagarjha 8y ago
        We come up with alternative energy sources and implement them, as we are slowly doing already.
        ThomPete 8y ago
        If you are talking about wind and sun then they are only providing a fraction of what the world needs right now less than 1%. Even with unheard improvements they wouldn't be getting much above 5%. Don't believe the hype.
thinkcontext 8y ago
There will be costs either for action or inaction on climate change, economists attempt to put numbers on both of those. Here's an editorial from Nature that introduces a recent study, as well as a skeptical rebuttal. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05219-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05219-5 In this thread I've had a hard time figuring out what you mean by "dealing with" the effects of climate change, by mentioning "price" you give some hint that economic analysis. Do you consider this a worthy way of deciding whether to take action or not? It sounds like you've made up your mind on costs, but again, I can't tell.

3 ms·

Dealing with what and how and at what price? Should we stop poor countries from using fossil fuels which is what they primarily are using right now?

by ThomPete 8y ago

saagarjha 8y ago
> Should we stop poor countries from using fossil fuels which is what they primarily are using right now? I mean, that would one thing we could work on.
- ThomPete 8y ago
  So basically let them starve and freeze so you can feel better about yourself? Or what's your solution exactly?
  - saagarjha 8y ago
    > So basically let them starve and freeze so you can feel better about yourself? This is a strawman argument, and you know it. The rest of the world is hard at work trying to come up with better ways to meet energy needs that have a smaller impact on our climate.
    - ThomPete 8y ago
      No it was a question and you havent answered it. How do we do that?
      - saagarjha 8y ago
        We come up with alternative energy sources and implement them, as we are slowly doing already.
        ThomPete 8y ago
        If you are talking about wind and sun then they are only providing a fraction of what the world needs right now less than 1%. Even with unheard improvements they wouldn't be getting much above 5%. Don't believe the hype.
thinkcontext 8y ago
There will be costs either for action or inaction on climate change, economists attempt to put numbers on both of those. Here's an editorial from Nature that introduces a recent study, as well as a skeptical rebuttal. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05219-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05219-5 In this thread I've had a hard time figuring out what you mean by "dealing with" the effects of climate change, by mentioning "price" you give some hint that economic analysis. Do you consider this a worthy way of deciding whether to take action or not? It sounds like you've made up your mind on costs, but again, I can't tell.