3 ms·

Putin may yet turn out to have the most positive effect of anyone in history on weaning the world from our fossil fuel addiction. I'd love to see him get an aw

• MaxHoppersGhost 5y ago
  Russian oil can just be replaced with American or Saudi oil. They produce a lot but I don’t think this helps reduce demand for oil other than high prices making green alternatives relatively cheaper. Higher prices also means that more people invest in oil and gas exploration and drilling.
  • pvarangot 5y ago
    High prices also lead to more destructive and less understood methods of extraction like hydrofracturing, that uses a shit ton of water and may lead to immediate but long lasting environmental impact.
    • MaxHoppersGhost 5y ago
      Incorrect. Low prices created fracking. Fracking was invented to get oil out of formations that otherwise weren’t economic to drill. This is basic knowledge if you know anything about fracking. This takes away any credibility you have regarding environmental impacts of fracking.
      • pvarangot 5y ago
        Thanks for rudely correcting me. It was my understanding that most fracking in the US just doesn't happen or slows down until the barrel reaches a certain price because new wells just don't get drilled.
• AtlasBarfed 5y ago
  I always joked that Republican presidencies would induce recessions that were far more of a positive environmental effect at the macro level than Democratic false advocacy. Nobody in the liberal circles every found that funny. Obama's solar investments seemed to spur action globally, I'm not sure any of the government loans actually produced viable domestic solar, but it probably got the Chinese gung-ho on dominating the sector. So the Chinese government between pushing/subsidizing batteries+EV production and solar production may get the real environmental awards. I hear they are also doing the only real investment in MSR/LFTR/nuclear, so if that pans out then that's another feather in their cap. Reflecting the practical ignorance of environmentalism by both parties, I always called myself a despotic environmentalist for political identification, but the Chinese actually did it, and it may represent our only practical hope: fundamentally enabling the sea change in LCOE cost of solar/wind and the viability of EVs in worldwide consumer transport. If the chinese companies do really get 230-260 wh/kg LFP chemistry scaled, and 150-200 wh/kg sodium ion batteries, then the path to worldwide EV transport for almost everything except air that doesn't need cobalt / nickel becomes fairly clear.
  • ghostbrainalpha 5y ago
    I'm very liberal, and I think your joke is HILARIOUS. My favorite humor is where you don't pick a side, and everyone comes out looking shitty.
  • danans 5y ago
    > I always joked that Republican presidencies would induce recessions that were far more of a positive environmental effect at the macro level than Democratic false advocacy. Nobody in the liberal circles every found that funny. Funny joke. But it rings kind of hollow. Those recessions do little for long term environmental improvement because they channel investment toward the cheapest price (at the time) but highest externality sources of energy, like coal. People getting poorer and running their heating less doesn't help get us off fossil fuels. Arguably the high fuel prices spurred by Arab oil embargo and the now the Ukraine invasion, coupled with higher fuel economy standards, real climate advocacy, and subsidies for renewable generation have had more of a macro effect on reducing emissions than any recessions one might attribute (fairly or not) to Republican presidents.