5 ms·

There's an interesting viewpoint that comes through in these comments that seems to imply that the policy and regulatory side of climate isn't "doing", and that

There's an interesting viewpoint that comes through in these comments that seems to imply that the policy and regulatory side of climate isn't "doing", and that engineering or science roles would be more beneficial to make tangible progress. I'd like to challenge that view -- it's my belief that at this point climate is really no longer mainly an engineering or science problem. If we allocated our money and effort correctly, we could tackle a huge part of the problem NOW, with current technology. And this lack of will is ultimately a policy and regulatory problem at heart. This isn't to say there aren't many engineering challenges or potential engineering solutions. But for the most part I see those as only being necessary if the desire to fix things stays at its (very low) current level.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago
I'd agree, it's always been a "collective action" problem, we could all have adopted a carbon tax years ago and the problem would have solved itself. But, if one country or one political party defects, then they can profit themselves at the expense of everyone. I'm also a big fan of the effective "regulatory funny business" that have been regularly maligned, like seperating the carbon and electricity components of electricity production, and offsetting carbon for flights with easy wins of replacing kerosene with solar in developing countries. It's the simplest and easiest solution, and it's not primarily technical, just about creating a market. But it's been viciously attacked for so long it's all gets done quietly when reactionary voters aren't paying attention, even though it's worked really well wherever it's been used.
Voloskaya 5y ago
Policy and regulation are indeed extremely important, at least as much as engineering. Implementing a carbon tax would probably be the single most effective thing we can do. However, I do not agree that climate change is no longer an engineering/science issue: Even if we were to magically stop emitting any GHG tomorrow, we would still be in for a pretty rough time (albeit much better than our current trajectory). And realistically, even with the best imaginable policies in place everywhere around the world we will still need to emit GHGs for decades no matter what. Developing carbon removal technologies is absolutely essential to solve this problem.

ZeroGravitas 5y ago

I'd agree, it's always been a "collective action" problem, we could all have adopted a carbon tax years ago and the problem would have solved itself. But, if one country or one political party defects, then they can profit themselves at the expense of everyone. I'm also a big fan of the effective "regulatory funny business" that have been regularly maligned, like seperating the carbon and electricity components of electricity production, and offsetting carbon for flights with easy wins of replacing kerosene with solar in developing countries. It's the simplest and easiest solution, and it's not primarily technical, just about creating a market. But it's been viciously attacked for so long it's all gets done quietly when reactionary voters aren't paying attention, even though it's worked really well wherever it's been used.

Voloskaya 5y ago

Policy and regulation are indeed extremely important, at least as much as engineering. Implementing a carbon tax would probably be the single most effective thing we can do. However, I do not agree that climate change is no longer an engineering/science issue: Even if we were to magically stop emitting any GHG tomorrow, we would still be in for a pretty rough time (albeit much better than our current trajectory). And realistically, even with the best imaginable policies in place everywhere around the world we will still need to emit GHGs for decades no matter what. Developing carbon removal technologies is absolutely essential to solve this problem.