4 ms·
> Every new fossil energy project is incompatible with a world that takes climate change seriously. Money talks. This depends on more information. It’s unlikel
by prepend 4y ago
> Every new fossil energy project is incompatible with a world that takes climate change seriously. Money talks.
This depends on more information. It’s unlikely we’ll be using zero fossil fuels in 35 years. So the goal is to reduce over time, so a new project today could be replacing an old project going offline.
Or perhaps the project has a transition path to do something else.
I don’t think these are pedantic clarifications as things aren’t fatalistic. Investors are rational and while money talks it doesn’t mean that all the billions put into these projects isn’t a waste in climate terms.
- ahelwer 4y agoWell, here's your more information: https://i.imgur.com/B2QBY6u.png https://i.imgur.com/B2QBY6u.png Fossil fuel investment has been climbing year-over-year. Fossil fuel companies aren't replacing existing infrastructure to taper out usage of fossil fuels. They are introducing and expanding with new infrastructure. From the Bloomberg NEF 2023 Energy Transition Investment Trends report, which is incredible reading: https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/ https://about.bnef.com/energy-transition-investment/
- prepend 4y agoThis is just a 5 year graph and it seems to show level funding. Where do you see expansion in this graph? Of course any investment is new infrastructure. I think the analysis you want to do is a long term trend line of fossil fuel investment and a projection into the future. What we, hopefully, want to see is that the overall % energy production projected into the future is decreasing.