4 ms·

What are you hoping to prove with this? In terms of what they are actually doing, it sounds like they're installing a lot of renewable energy. Indeed, more than

by imgabe 6y ago

What are you hoping to prove with this? In terms of what they are actually doing, it sounds like they're installing a lot of renewable energy. Indeed, more than most places. Do you also expect the Texas government to bust into oil and gas company headquarters and force them to say they believe in global warming? What does it matter who believes what if the real things that are actually happening are that they build a lot of renewable energy sources?

filoeleven 6y ago
> Do you also expect the Texas government to bust into oil and gas company headquarters and force them to say they believe in global warming? Expect them to? No. Wish for it? Yeah, definitely. And then hold them accountable for the decades of gaslighting while they knew that was the case. That’s kind of the role of a government. How is GameStop stock more controversial than climate change denial? GameStop is ephemeral, climate change is existential. The easy thing is to say “bankrupt the fuckers, kill the orgs!” and I feel that. I want to see them suffer for the path they’ve put the whole planet on. The responsible societal thing to do though is probably to mandate renewables, stop petro subsidies, and make them eat the cost for the switch if they (the orgs) want to stay alive. We have the evidence; it’s public knowledge now even if not widely disseminated. They’re adding renewables, but not fast enough because there is still profit to be made in petro even though it fucks us further. That has to stop ASAP. Governments are the place where that happens. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189551
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
walrus01 6y ago
> Do you also expect the Texas government to bust into oil and gas company headquarters and force them to say they believe in global warming? Actually, yes, I would be perfectly happy if the oil industry was not run on full 'free market' capitalist principles, and they acknowledged climate change is real. An article contrasting the Alberta and Norwegian oil industries. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/canada-competes/what-norway-did-with-its-oil-and-we-didnt/article11959362/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/c...
tsimionescu 6y ago
> What does it matter who believes what if the real things that are actually happening are that they build a lot of renewable energy sources? It matters A LOT. The anti-climate change propaganda is one of the biggest roadblocks to meaningful climate action. In a normal world, the population of the US would have risen up instantly if their president had withdrawn from climate accords or forced the EPA not to talk about global warming. These are lunatic acts, much crazier than the than Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Sure, it's nice that they're planting a few wind farms. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to the real changes required if we are to stop global warming from completely dooming our civilization. Building wind-farms would have been a solution if it had started 40 years ago. Today, the only option is to stop most non-renewable plants, and most factories that rely on their power. We need to produce a fraction of the goods we are producing today (not talking about the US specifically, this is a global problem), with all the human costs that will entail. I'm not holding my breath for any of it.
- onepointsixC 6y ago
  In a normal world, the population of the US would have risen up instantly if their president had signed such a do nothing deal like the climate accords which fails to even get us within spitting distance of dealing with the issue. The solution wasn't building wind farms, it was finishing the nuclear build up like they had originally planed, just like how France did. But that was killed by self proclaimed environmentalists of that era.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Quite possibly, though there are/were good reasons to be wary of nuclear energy as well. I do personally believe that the risks from global warming outweigh those from nuclear plants at this time, but I don't think this was clear at all 50 years ago.

by imgabe 6y ago

filoeleven 6y ago

> Do you also expect the Texas government to bust into oil and gas company headquarters and force them to say they believe in global warming? Expect them to? No. Wish for it? Yeah, definitely. And then hold them accountable for the decades of gaslighting while they knew that was the case. That’s kind of the role of a government. How is GameStop stock more controversial than climate change denial? GameStop is ephemeral, climate change is existential. The easy thing is to say “bankrupt the fuckers, kill the orgs!” and I feel that. I want to see them suffer for the path they’ve put the whole planet on. The responsible societal thing to do though is probably to mandate renewables, stop petro subsidies, and make them eat the cost for the switch if they (the orgs) want to stay alive. We have the evidence; it’s public knowledge now even if not widely disseminated. They’re adding renewables, but not fast enough because there is still profit to be made in petro even though it fucks us further. That has to stop ASAP. Governments are the place where that happens. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189551 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26189551

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

walrus01 6y ago

> Do you also expect the Texas government to bust into oil and gas company headquarters and force them to say they believe in global warming? Actually, yes, I would be perfectly happy if the oil industry was not run on full 'free market' capitalist principles, and they acknowledged climate change is real. An article contrasting the Alberta and Norwegian oil industries. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/canada-competes/what-norway-did-with-its-oil-and-we-didnt/article11959362/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/c...

tsimionescu 6y ago

> What does it matter who believes what if the real things that are actually happening are that they build a lot of renewable energy sources? It matters A LOT. The anti-climate change propaganda is one of the biggest roadblocks to meaningful climate action. In a normal world, the population of the US would have risen up instantly if their president had withdrawn from climate accords or forced the EPA not to talk about global warming. These are lunatic acts, much crazier than the than Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Sure, it's nice that they're planting a few wind farms. But that is a drop in the bucket compared to the real changes required if we are to stop global warming from completely dooming our civilization. Building wind-farms would have been a solution if it had started 40 years ago. Today, the only option is to stop most non-renewable plants, and most factories that rely on their power. We need to produce a fraction of the goods we are producing today (not talking about the US specifically, this is a global problem), with all the human costs that will entail. I'm not holding my breath for any of it.

onepointsixC 6y ago
In a normal world, the population of the US would have risen up instantly if their president had signed such a do nothing deal like the climate accords which fails to even get us within spitting distance of dealing with the issue. The solution wasn't building wind farms, it was finishing the nuclear build up like they had originally planed, just like how France did. But that was killed by self proclaimed environmentalists of that era.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  Quite possibly, though there are/were good reasons to be wary of nuclear energy as well. I do personally believe that the risks from global warming outweigh those from nuclear plants at this time, but I don't think this was clear at all 50 years ago.