4 ms·
This won't work. We need real regulation that penalizes polluters so much that it's no longer profitable to destroy the planet. We need social and cultural chan
by dckeyjqmon 6y ago
This won't work. We need real regulation that penalizes polluters so much that it's no longer profitable to destroy the planet. We need social and cultural changes so that it's no longer hip and cool to fly around on jet planes and cars. This is mostly a political issue, not an issue of private industries in search of profits.
- dawnerd 6y agoOkay so we pass regulations but we still need new technology to make manufacturing and so on cleaner.
- IanDrake 6y agoGood luck with that. I assume you live in a hut made from naturally fallen trees some where with no heating, air conditioning, running water, sewers, paved streets, computers, etc... I'm kidding, of course you're not. You're standing on the shoulders of giants, but you think you're flying.
- wpasc 6y agoI could not disagree more. The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to. Private companies that could develop/build/scale such technologies and deploy them who seek profit are a viable method because the profit motive can deploy capital to that effect. Government research and regulations could help speed the development of these technologies and hasten their tipping point through adjusting the cost. This is certainly not just a political issue and culture most often follows the past of least resistance. Telling people to stop consuming energy is a more quixotic endeavor than developing more economic renewables
- GreeniFi 6y ago“ The second that renewable energy is a more economic and reliable way to consume energy it will easily become the default because there will be no reason not to.” You ignore the realpolitik of climate change. FYI certain fossil fuel producing states invest heavily to disrupt the transition to renewables. Ask yourself why the Green Climate Fund, probably the most important fund of its type, is based is based in the arse-end or nowhere.
- bradstewart 6y agoCertain ones do, sure. But not all, or even most. The vast majority of countries do not produce fossil fuels, so they all have an interest in reducing dependence on oil. I know nothing about the GCF or the geography of Korea, but ~2 hours from Seoul doesn't really seem like the "arse-end of nowhere"?
- lotsofpulp 6y ago>Telling people to stop consuming energy is a more quixotic endeavor than developing more economic renewables Appropriately taxing energy consumption in order to force people to appropriately ration energy consumption for productive endeavors is more realistic than assuming humans are going to discover a preferable energy source than fossil fuels to move mass in a short enough timeframe to make an impact on climate change and pollution.
- dpweb 6y agoThe biggest incentive for fossil fuel generated electricity is 0.06-0.10 cents per Kwh fossil fuel generated electricity. Electricity is cheap. There's two ways to make a renewables economy, it's not complicated. The quick way, 200% tax on all fossil fuel generated electricity. The slow way, wait for technology to evolve that renewables become cheaper than fossil fuel. Government could help companies and utilities transition.
- pinkfoot 6y ago> We need real regulation that penalizes polluters How are you going to penalise the other 7,000,000,000 people that don't live in the USA/EU/Japan? Growing at 3 souls per second. The only way is to provide a cleaner alternative for base line coal with 100% dispatch ration that is cheaper than coal. Because that is what the next five billion are going to use otherwise - whether you like it or not. If you solve this, then - like smartphones - they will line up around the block to buy it and you won't have to convince or police anyone. Right now, thorium breeder reactors seem the only thing.