4 ms·
I think renewable energy with no quality of living sacrifice and a lot of money means that this will not be possible for a lot of people without other changes.
by reallydontask 7y ago
I think renewable energy with no quality of living sacrifice and a lot of money means that this will not be possible for a lot of people without other changes.
I'm fortunate enough to be able to afford to pay twice as much for the electricity we consume and not have to sacrifice anything. I'd guess, based on your comment, you are on the same, privileged, boat. Others are not so lucky, which means that they will need some sort of help, which might not be politically palatable because, mainly shortsightedness.
- adrianN 7y agoAdding wind or solar is currently cheaper than adding coal. The marginal costs of renewable energy are pretty low. The investment costs are also lower than the damage climate change will cause. If we really wanted to we could switch to 100% renewables, for example by printing more money. But just stopping subsidies for fossil fuels or setting up a carbon tax would be good steps.
- reallydontask 7y agoI was hardly advocating adding more coal. Removing fossil fuel subsidies and setting up meaningful carbon taxes are steps in the right direction, but this means that the price the consumer pays will, ultimately, be higher, which is the point I was trying to make. FWIW, it's something that I strongly believe we should be doing but through a combination of circumstances will only very slowly happen.