4 ms·

The COVID response showed that governments (not all) can take drastic action when needed, both to limit the spread of the decease as well as to protect the econ

• f6v 6y ago
  > If they treated the climate emergency as the crisis it is They treat it as politicians that need to get re-elected, since that's linked to direct and indirect financial rewards. However, climate is something which is going to dramatically change in 50-100 years. The sea levels might not rise by 1 meter in the next 10-20 years. That means climate change isn't this government's problem. So no, there isn't a government on this planet that is going to treat climate change as an emergency.
  • Ma8ee 6y ago
    It’s just enough that enough of their constituents do for them to start caring. A lot of young people and people with kids already care a lot. If people can worry about the deficit 10 or 15 years down the line people can worry about climate change.
    • whimsicalism 6y ago
      > A lot of young people and people with kids already care a lot. A lot of young people say they want to combat climate change and want politicians to do so. But I've also seen the studies when those same people are asked about willingness to pay/sacrifice to accomplish that goal. They are... not good. We will see if the next generation supports a carbon tax if it means higher prices for consumer goods and the benefits disproportionately accrue to people 2 generations down the line.
      • Ma8ee 6y ago
        Which studies?
        • whimsicalism 6y ago
          https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/who-is-willing-to-pay-more-for-renewable-energy/ https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/who-is-wi... Interestingly, the younger generation is less willing to pay than the 30-44 age group, even though willingness to pay is uncorrelated with income.
          • Ma8ee 6y ago
            Talk about cherrypicking the results. Yes, slightly more 30-44 year olds are willing to pay more for renewable energy than 18-29 year olds. But both of those groups are much bigger than the two groups 45-59 and 60+. So the reasonable conclusion is the opposite of what you suggest.
            • whimsicalism 6y ago
              I guess my thinking is combatting climate change is going to cost more than $10/mo on the electrical bill, I pay like $5k/mo in tax and apparently most people in a similar financial situation can't accept an increase of like 0.5% of what they pay in taxes to avert climate change. $10/mo is very little, and the fact that we can barely get majorities of the younger generation to say that that would be okay is disheartening.
• captainredbeard 6y ago
  If the government treated climate like they did COVID (lockdowns, etc.) it would trigger a civil war in the United States.
  • Ma8ee 6y ago
    The sad thing is that the necessary actions would impact people’s life directly much less that the COVID restrictions. Petrol and flying would become expensive, and some jobs would disappear and be replaced with other jobs, sometimes somewhere else.
    • Supermancho 6y ago
      > some jobs would disappear Some communities would disappear. Look at Canada. Without trucking, air or train with low-cost energy-efficient fuel combustion to move goods, you have no way to supply the vast majority of the inland for large countries.
      • whimsicalism 6y ago
        We already heavily subsidize rural living in the US, no reason we couldn't just offset the emissions necessary to deliver goods to rural areas and encourage urbanization (which is not where most emissions are coming from).
      • Ma8ee 6y ago
        Yes, but that is nothing new. How many people do you need to run a mine today compared with 40 years ago. Or cutting down lumber or run a steel mill. So most communities far from cities are already gone. In addition, trucking et c. will not disappear. The moment the economic incentives are there, there will be hydrogen fuel cell trucks on the roads in almost a blink. The technology is there.
• jcims 6y ago
  >There are no technical or economical hurdles that stops us from strongly mitigate the climate change. I think if actually work through a solution in just about any industry you'll find that it's actually fairly complex, both in terms of technical implementation and economic adaptation.
  • whimsicalism 6y ago
    > both in terms of technical implementation and economic adaptation. Can you elaborate with an example? Most industry has managed to completely transition from coal -> natgas in the last decade and a half so I find it hard to believe that the transition is just so complex it isn't possible. If we price carbon at what it actually costs, seems like they'd figure out how to transition again.
    • lanstin 6y ago
      I heard a podcast interview with Bill Gates recently on this subject, in which he identifies cement and steel as largely unsolved in terms of carbon impact. solar and electric cars is probably good enough for residential and transport. (Kara Swisher’s Sway on 15Feb)
      • whimsicalism 6y ago
        Price carbon at the cost needed to offset that carbon, use the price to offset the carbon.
      • Ma8ee 6y ago
        Fossil free large scale steel plants are built in this moment: https://www.ssab.com/company/sustainability/sustainable-operations/hybrit https://www.ssab.com/company/sustainability/sustainable-oper...
        • jcims 6y ago
          If you read that it's mostly talking about electrification of the steel mills and mining operations. It's a required step ultimately but is only as carbon neutral as the power coming into the facility.
• core-questions 6y ago
  > The COVID response showed that governments (not all) can take drastic action when needed, If this is our rubric and measure of good governance, why don't we all just become fascists already? At least in that case we could pretend to be unified and proud of what we're doing, instead of this chaotic, bungled, arbitrary response that takes hints from authoritarianism without getting any of its benefits. > There are no technical or economical hurdles that stops us from strongly mitigate the climate change. This statement is absurd. Do you have some magic wand that is going to solve the car problem, or the international shipment problem? Have you got some secret battery technology that you aren't letting on about, perhaps one that doesn't require extremely expensive rare materials to produce? Remember, as you drive your Tesla around, that nigh-indentured Chinese workers essentially engaged in mining actions arguably worse than classic colonialism in Africa are responsible for providing you with your "clean" vehicle, which will probably never make up for the emissions created in its production....
  • Ma8ee 6y ago
    The car problem is solved. There are huge battery factories built all over the world right now. Most major car manufacturers are releasing several electric cars this year. I’d bet you that few cars run by fossil fuels will be sold in Europe or North America in ten years from now.
    • core-questions 6y ago
      The car problem is solved when I have a wide selection of used electric cars in the $10k price range that I can work on in my own garage. That's still a decade out. > I’d bet you that few cars run by fossil fuels will be sold in Europe or North America in ten years from now Pipe dream. I'd take that bet. You'll have to weasel out with creative definitions of "few".... not everyone lives in the city, man.