3 ms·
Since the western lifestyle produces 17 tons/person/year, even if that $100/ton we're a scalable reality it would still be way too expensive. One way to pay for
by guelo 7y ago
Since the western lifestyle produces 17 tons/person/year, even if that $100/ton we're a scalable reality it would still be way too expensive. One way to pay for that would be a carbon tax, but it's becoming pretty obvious at this point that environmentalists are going to lose the argument for doing anything at the coordinated global governments level, so that means the only possible salvation is going to come if someone can figure out how to make money from it. The price needs to be negative per ton. Let's hope that capitalists can save us.
- rayiner 7y agoThanks to nuclear power France is at 5 tons per capita per year. About 1.3% of French GDP. Way cheaper than the economic damage that will be inflicted by “doing anything at the coordinates global governments level.”
- guelo 7y agoCapitalists don't like nuclear, it only works if it's subsidized by governments. But due to your ideological position about the damage that governments cause, which is also the most powerful ruling ideology in the world, nuclear plants are not going to be built.
- rayiner 7y agoI don’t have a problem with government subsidizing capital intensive technology, especially technology like nuclear that has military applications. Subsidies (or taxes) are relatively straightforward and transparent. I have a problem with government planning of the economy and international government coordination.