4 ms·
Yes it would be terribly foolhardy for us to stop polluting the atmosphere prematurely.
by lucisferre 7y ago
Yes it would be terribly foolhardy for us to stop polluting the atmosphere prematurely.
- protanopia 7y agoCarbon dioxide is not a pollutant.
- polotics 7y agoToo much of it is, as water in your lungs, or air in your beer: having too much of it will make your greenhouse too hot, the one you live in and cannot leave.
- protanopia 7y agoBut more than the current amount will help crops grow better and prevent people from freezing to death in winter.
- zaroth 7y agoThis isn’t really a helpful reply, because of course it’s not a question of magically reducing pollution. There are two basic modes of reducing pollution. Technological advancement, and conservation. In the case of technological advancement, you get less pollution per unit of output as the same or lower cost. As long as capital is fairly cheap, these advances tend to propagate quickly through a competitive market. In the case of conservation, it’s more a question of which groups of people should conserve (i.e. suffer) for this outcome, and by how much.
- imtringued 7y agoWhy do governments fail to take advantage of this opportunity to inject money into their economy? Didn't Trump promise to bring the manufacturing jobs back? How is he going to achieve that if he's not going to rebuild the current power infrastructure or discourages companies from investing into the lucrative EV market? I'm seriously wondering why there is any reason to oppose technological progress at all. What can they possibly gain by sticking to the old technology? Who's going to benefit from something so short sighted?
- Kaiyou 7y agoWe might be steering into an ice age and Co2 induced global warming is the only way for humanity to survive.
- polotics 7y agoThat would be cool, please post links to your model's source code and data set.