3 ms·
Given that the poorest are not disproportionately consuming the least-clean energy, I think the poverty issue is minimal. My parents smoked heavily. Even after
by sago 7y ago
Given that the poorest are not disproportionately consuming the least-clean energy, I think the poverty issue is minimal.
My parents smoked heavily. Even after the causal connection with lung cancer was well-established. Even though both of them lost their father to lung cancer. Even though their child (me) suffered from asthma, to the extent of being hospitalised. I know addiction is a thing. But there was no sense that those choices were made because of the physical compulsion. There were no attempts to quit. The biggest addiction was mental: a lack of any interest in trying.
I don't think it is helpful to claim we are 'addicted' to high-carbon energy. But whatever the label, there is mind-boggling inertia in the human soul.
- ckastner 7y agoNobody drives a shitty, old, inefficient, dirty gas guzzler because they are addicted to them. They drive them because they can't afford something better. A solar panel is probably an unaffordable object for at least a quarter of the world's population.
- sago 7y agoNo, but plenty of people drive brand-new, expensive, inefficient gas guzzlers. Poor folks are much more likely to buy a cheap small engine Honda than a 200 cu.in. un-aerodynamic brick. Guzzling gas is expensive. And the poorest ¼ of the world contribute way way way less than ¼ of our CO₂ emissions.
- jabl 7y agoI guess culture just has to change, so that a gaz guzzler isn't a status symbol. Say, a sailing yacht? Or a telescope in your front yard (for watching the stars, of course, not spying on the neighbors getting it on). Or bling-bling to hang around your neck? I mean, plenty of ways to show your wealth without it having to be a big FU to the planet.