2 ms·

I think its important to understand that there are very few 'climate deniers' alot of opposition comes from people who refuse to give a blanc cheque to take ext

I think its important to understand that there are very few 'climate deniers' alot of opposition comes from people who refuse to give a blanc cheque to take extreme measures to stop any form of enviromental damage or Co2 emission. From an economic standpoint we've benefitted so much on these early versions of power harvesting that taking drastic measures would destroy economies, The people who would be hurt most by a economic downturn are people who do not have enough resources to support their daily needs. That's why politicians want a clear, concise solution that still allows the economy to grow. William D. Nordhaus won the nobel price for analysing different scenario's to see what the optimal balance is between the economy and policy change. You can't throw money at the problem if there is none. every person I've met has been of outstanding moral character and somewhat decent understanding of the problem, therefore I think the reluctance of extreme measures can be seen as the wisdom of a crowd. No one wants to step too hard on eachother's toes for a good reason. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2018/nordhaus/lecture/ https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2018/nor...

consumer451 5y ago
Could you please provide specific policy examples that would illustrate drastic vs non-drastic measures? I think it would help me understand your point more fully.
- Out_of_Characte 5y ago
  The most tone deaf promise/policy is to be completely carbon neutral by year x. It really doesn't seem likely we'll be turning off the last fossil fuel power plant any time soon. and no amount of carbon tax is suddenly going to make the production of steel or fertilizer carbon neutral. even research can only reduce, not eliminate alot of key components in order to have a functioning society. I also think alot of developed countries are already doing their best to produce better sustainable alternatives for key area's like double glass windows or capturing more green energy. Its the developing world that still increases their fossil fuels and has little money for longterm development. Even more problematic, I think, by proxy of high energy prices, companies and products that hurt the enviroment the most have fled to countries with the least restrictions. trying to reel that in to more developed countries is on the same complexity level as eliminating tax evasion schemes. And I dont see many on HN believing that's simple to do.

consumer451 5y ago

Could you please provide specific policy examples that would illustrate drastic vs non-drastic measures? I think it would help me understand your point more fully.

Out_of_Characte 5y ago
The most tone deaf promise/policy is to be completely carbon neutral by year x. It really doesn't seem likely we'll be turning off the last fossil fuel power plant any time soon. and no amount of carbon tax is suddenly going to make the production of steel or fertilizer carbon neutral. even research can only reduce, not eliminate alot of key components in order to have a functioning society. I also think alot of developed countries are already doing their best to produce better sustainable alternatives for key area's like double glass windows or capturing more green energy. Its the developing world that still increases their fossil fuels and has little money for longterm development. Even more problematic, I think, by proxy of high energy prices, companies and products that hurt the enviroment the most have fled to countries with the least restrictions. trying to reel that in to more developed countries is on the same complexity level as eliminating tax evasion schemes. And I dont see many on HN believing that's simple to do.