3 ms·

You have evidently not seen the cost curves of renewable energy sources. They have declined through many orders of magnitude, with no end in sight, similarly t

by ncmncm 4y ago

You have evidently not seen the cost curves of renewable energy sources. They have declined through many orders of magnitude, with no end in sight, similarly to transistors following Moore's Law. "Will be" is exactly what policy needs to be based on. Policy based on "what was" is policy failure. You are very confused about this "category 1". Literally nobody advocates for any measure that would interfere with economic prosperity. Action preventing climate catastrophe and collapse of civilization would discomfit only those heavily bought into the petroleum economy.

prottog 4y ago
In one hand you see no end in sight of continued technological advances that have heretofore led to decreasing unit costs in renewable energy, yet on the other hand you see imminent collapse of civilization? Are the two hands joined to the same person? If all-in renewable energy costs including storage do in fact continue to decline at the rate you imply it will, then it looks like we won't have to do anything special to bring about the end of fossil fuels. Prices will do that automatically. > Literally nobody advocates for any measure that would interfere with economic prosperity Most every proposed solution I've seen to the imminent climate catastrophe involves making it more expensive to maintain current living standards, maybe with a side order of claiming current living standards are immoral. What are these measures that make substantial headway against climate change without making people poorer? > those heavily bought into the petroleum economy You don't have to own stock in Exxon and Shell to be "bought in" to the petroleum economy. The global economy is the petroleum economy, because in the aggregate every problem facing humanity is an energy problem. I don't think many people particularly care where their energy comes from, as long as it comes to them cheaply and reliably, and so far fossil fuels have other sources beat. I'm not invested either emotionally or financially in seeing the continued success of fossil fuels; I'm invested in maintaining high living standards for myself and raising the living standards of the global poor. I remain skeptical that climate change will collapse civilization anytime soon.
- ncmncm 4y ago
  > "...every proposed solution I've seen to the imminent climate catastrophe involves making it more expensive to maintain current living standards..." False. Every solution involves producing energy radically more cheaply than any ever before, with no chokehold by any gatekeeper. I can see why this would be unattractive to you, if it might interfere with personally raising your own standard of living relative to your neighbors.

by ncmncm 4y ago

prottog 4y ago

In one hand you see no end in sight of continued technological advances that have heretofore led to decreasing unit costs in renewable energy, yet on the other hand you see imminent collapse of civilization? Are the two hands joined to the same person? If all-in renewable energy costs including storage do in fact continue to decline at the rate you imply it will, then it looks like we won't have to do anything special to bring about the end of fossil fuels. Prices will do that automatically. > Literally nobody advocates for any measure that would interfere with economic prosperity Most every proposed solution I've seen to the imminent climate catastrophe involves making it more expensive to maintain current living standards, maybe with a side order of claiming current living standards are immoral. What are these measures that make substantial headway against climate change without making people poorer? > those heavily bought into the petroleum economy You don't have to own stock in Exxon and Shell to be "bought in" to the petroleum economy. The global economy is the petroleum economy, because in the aggregate every problem facing humanity is an energy problem. I don't think many people particularly care where their energy comes from, as long as it comes to them cheaply and reliably, and so far fossil fuels have other sources beat. I'm not invested either emotionally or financially in seeing the continued success of fossil fuels; I'm invested in maintaining high living standards for myself and raising the living standards of the global poor. I remain skeptical that climate change will collapse civilization anytime soon.

ncmncm 4y ago
> "...every proposed solution I've seen to the imminent climate catastrophe involves making it more expensive to maintain current living standards..." False. Every solution involves producing energy radically more cheaply than any ever before, with no chokehold by any gatekeeper. I can see why this would be unattractive to you, if it might interfere with personally raising your own standard of living relative to your neighbors.