5 ms·

Some of what the author says is accurate. Carbon offset credits are bunk. Industrial agriculture is harmful. There are environmental issues to a lot of the “gre

by lumb63 4y ago

Some of what the author says is accurate. Carbon offset credits are bunk. Industrial agriculture is harmful. There are environmental issues to a lot of the “greening” practices. There are issues around how equitably the climate change revolution is going to impact different demographics. Some of what the author says is false. Consumer choices do make a difference. I work in climate tech and the product my company produces monitors electricity usage in the home. The average user reduces their home electricity usage by 7% in the first month, solely due to becoming aware of what they are using. Residential electricity usage is something like 45% of electricity usage here in the states, I believe. That’s huge progress due to consumer choice. Electric vehicles are progress. There are companies developing new ways to extract lithium that do not destroy the environment as much as brining does. As where ICEs inherently must pollute (good luck having combustion without emitting CO2), electric power has the ability to become renewable and green. Oil companies are a hundred years ahead and have governments in their pockets, subsidies, and well-established infrastructure in place already. If renewable energy were in that position, there would be no contest in what was more eco-friendly. Calling for “reparative justice” is another fear-mongering, divide-and-conquer strategy. The proper path forward IMO is capturing externalities so they can be incorporated into the existing economic framework. That’s what drives behavior of companies. I’m talking about putting a price on carbon. I’m talking about taxing land use at different rates for agricultural operations based on the type of agriculture being done. Imagine how quickly companies would change their behaviors if they had to pay the full price of what their fossil fuel usage or monoculture farming costs us collectively.

landemva 4y ago
> The proper path forward IMO is capturing externalities so they can be incorporated into the existing economic framework. I totally agree! No way China should be able to have price advantages due to lack of manufacturing pollution control. And Mexico makes engine blocks for the north because of the difficulty of getting environmental approval for foundries in the north. Pollution parity import tariffs will level the playing field and allow low-polluting factories to compete with the high polluting areas that are harming everyone. > change their behaviors if they had to pay the full price The imported igadgets and solar panels and baby rockers will be more expensive. If we manufacture at home we can even reduce usage of energy for transporting things from China.
- elwebmaster 4y ago
  That is the only way forward. The only problem is the Fed fighting a “war” with inflation. If they would just accept inflation as the necessary evil and impose tariffs on every polluting import, both the economy and citizens of the West would be much better off. Many more jobs would be created and and the competition for labor would keep driving compensation. After 10 years just denominate the dollar and all problems solved.
PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago
> The proper path forward IMO is capturing externalities so they can be incorporated into the existing economic framework. C.f. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-leah-garces.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas... in which there is an extended discussion of the way that meat production has become dramatically more efficient over the last 30 years but the low price that supposedly reflects this can more accurately be said to be due to new externalities that the industry created (and does not charge the consumer for at the transaction point). Klein does a good opening monologue about the importance of prices in a capitalist economy, and that while low prices are typically a good thing, they must reflect the true cost of the thing being paid for.
thinking4real 4y ago
“Electric vehicles are progress… has the potential to become renewable” How do you contradict yourself so quickly and not see it? Our electric cars aren’t using “renewable energy” (what a shifty term). They’re using oil being converted to electric energy (at a cost of losing some of the efficiency) Maybe someday these cars will use energy purely generated from the sun or wind, but given the volume of cars in the planet Im suspicious we’ll ever generate that much. This ignores a growing population where each year we collectively consume more and more Fusion would be a way to do it, or even fission, but for some reason we can’t consider fission and we don’t put nearly enough money into researching fusion
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  Where I live the great majority of electricity generation is renewable. Switching from internal combustion to EV is absolutely a net positive.
  - thinking4real 4y ago
    And where you live is no doubt a minority use case for the global situation. Right?
    - imtringued 4y ago
      Almost nobody generates electricity from oil in significant quantities.
      - Krssst 4y ago
        OP probably meant fossil fuels in general (gas/oil/coal).
        andrewjl 4y ago
        All 3 have very different impact on CO2 emissions.
    - 4y ago
jotato 4y ago
> I work in climate tech and the product my company produces monitors electricity usage in the home. The average user reduces their home electricity usage by 7% in the first month, solely due to becoming aware of what they are using. What product is that? I'd like to learn more
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

by lumb63 4y ago

landemva 4y ago

> The proper path forward IMO is capturing externalities so they can be incorporated into the existing economic framework. I totally agree! No way China should be able to have price advantages due to lack of manufacturing pollution control. And Mexico makes engine blocks for the north because of the difficulty of getting environmental approval for foundries in the north. Pollution parity import tariffs will level the playing field and allow low-polluting factories to compete with the high polluting areas that are harming everyone. > change their behaviors if they had to pay the full price The imported igadgets and solar panels and baby rockers will be more expensive. If we manufacture at home we can even reduce usage of energy for transporting things from China.

elwebmaster 4y ago
That is the only way forward. The only problem is the Fed fighting a “war” with inflation. If they would just accept inflation as the necessary evil and impose tariffs on every polluting import, both the economy and citizens of the West would be much better off. Many more jobs would be created and and the competition for labor would keep driving compensation. After 10 years just denominate the dollar and all problems solved.

PaulDavisThe1st 4y ago

> The proper path forward IMO is capturing externalities so they can be incorporated into the existing economic framework. C.f. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/opinion/ezra-klein-podcast-leah-garces.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/29/opinion/ezra-klein-podcas... in which there is an extended discussion of the way that meat production has become dramatically more efficient over the last 30 years but the low price that supposedly reflects this can more accurately be said to be due to new externalities that the industry created (and does not charge the consumer for at the transaction point). Klein does a good opening monologue about the importance of prices in a capitalist economy, and that while low prices are typically a good thing, they must reflect the true cost of the thing being paid for.

thinking4real 4y ago

“Electric vehicles are progress… has the potential to become renewable” How do you contradict yourself so quickly and not see it? Our electric cars aren’t using “renewable energy” (what a shifty term). They’re using oil being converted to electric energy (at a cost of losing some of the efficiency) Maybe someday these cars will use energy purely generated from the sun or wind, but given the volume of cars in the planet Im suspicious we’ll ever generate that much. This ignores a growing population where each year we collectively consume more and more Fusion would be a way to do it, or even fission, but for some reason we can’t consider fission and we don’t put nearly enough money into researching fusion

amanaplanacanal 4y ago
Where I live the great majority of electricity generation is renewable. Switching from internal combustion to EV is absolutely a net positive.
- thinking4real 4y ago
  And where you live is no doubt a minority use case for the global situation. Right?
  - imtringued 4y ago
    Almost nobody generates electricity from oil in significant quantities.
    - Krssst 4y ago
      OP probably meant fossil fuels in general (gas/oil/coal).
      - andrewjl 4y ago
        All 3 have very different impact on CO2 emissions.
  - 4y ago

jotato 4y ago

> I work in climate tech and the product my company produces monitors electricity usage in the home. The average user reduces their home electricity usage by 7% in the first month, solely due to becoming aware of what they are using. What product is that? I'd like to learn more

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]