3 ms·

> Only the threat of an "independent" taking control of the climate if the rest of us don't act can break the impasse. Honestly, I don't even think that would

> Only the threat of an "independent" taking control of the climate if the rest of us don't act can break the impasse. Honestly, I don't even think that would force the world to act. Human caused climate change is the largest collective action problem the world has ever seen. Its made worse by the fact that the effect lags the cause by multiple generations (or more), so all the people who were responsible will be (or already are) dead. I'm not optimistic about people choosing to pay more money or significantly change their lives (for the "worse") to help avoid future climate effects that will only come fully to fruition after they are dead. I just don't see the economics working out here.

topkai22 7y ago
I find climate panic to be really bad because I am optimistic about being able to significantly reduce emissions, and I think that panicked, depressed people convinced the world is going to end it harder to get everyone to adopt the policies needed. Right now oil is around $59/barrel and each barrel emits .43 tons of carbon. There are credible claims of carbon capture for $100/ton today, and that’s without a clear payoff or scale. So that means that enacting a carbon tax that is at parity with the cost of avoiding emissions ($100/ton) would less than double the raw material cost of oil and still keep the price well below the highs we saw in the 00s. The effect on consumers would be even less on a percentage wise basis, as the tax shouldn’t effect transport, processing, marketing, or other costs much. Not only could we manage pricing in carbon emissions in our economy, we’ve done so in the past.
- jalgos_eminator 7y ago
  Yeah, but the whole world has to collaborate to do this. That is the collective action problem, and that is where my doubts lie when people say "we can manage this".
  - topkai22 7y ago
    In my view, I’ve been surprised how much the world has already been willing to attack the problem. More conservative fossil fuel exporting countries like the US and Russia are resisting, but more left leaning and fuel importing countries such as most EU members and China are riving ahead with reforms. Perhaps as importantly very low carbon and carbon neutral energy and transportation options are becoming cost competitive with fossil fuels right now, without subsidies, and look to be continuing efficiency gains. It’s not inconceivable that carbon free becomes the standard for new vehicles and power plants purely on economic factors in the near-ish future. As that happens, the political constituencies that benefit from carbon tax and other emissions reducing schemes grow and you get a positive feedback loop. I know I sound a bit Pollyanna ish, but I wasn’t always- I actually expected the word to keep emitting because the near term human costs were high.Recent data on the cost of these options coming down has convinced me otherwise.

topkai22 7y ago

I find climate panic to be really bad because I am optimistic about being able to significantly reduce emissions, and I think that panicked, depressed people convinced the world is going to end it harder to get everyone to adopt the policies needed. Right now oil is around $59/barrel and each barrel emits .43 tons of carbon. There are credible claims of carbon capture for $100/ton today, and that’s without a clear payoff or scale. So that means that enacting a carbon tax that is at parity with the cost of avoiding emissions ($100/ton) would less than double the raw material cost of oil and still keep the price well below the highs we saw in the 00s. The effect on consumers would be even less on a percentage wise basis, as the tax shouldn’t effect transport, processing, marketing, or other costs much. Not only could we manage pricing in carbon emissions in our economy, we’ve done so in the past.

jalgos_eminator 7y ago
Yeah, but the whole world has to collaborate to do this. That is the collective action problem, and that is where my doubts lie when people say "we can manage this".
- topkai22 7y ago
  In my view, I’ve been surprised how much the world has already been willing to attack the problem. More conservative fossil fuel exporting countries like the US and Russia are resisting, but more left leaning and fuel importing countries such as most EU members and China are riving ahead with reforms. Perhaps as importantly very low carbon and carbon neutral energy and transportation options are becoming cost competitive with fossil fuels right now, without subsidies, and look to be continuing efficiency gains. It’s not inconceivable that carbon free becomes the standard for new vehicles and power plants purely on economic factors in the near-ish future. As that happens, the political constituencies that benefit from carbon tax and other emissions reducing schemes grow and you get a positive feedback loop. I know I sound a bit Pollyanna ish, but I wasn’t always- I actually expected the word to keep emitting because the near term human costs were high.Recent data on the cost of these options coming down has convinced me otherwise.