3 ms·

Electrifying 100% of everything existing now may not be a realistic goal. And applying Pareto and low hanging fruits may bring sooner some results. The article

Electrifying 100% of everything existing now may not be a realistic goal. And applying Pareto and low hanging fruits may bring sooner some results. The article is targeting homes mainly, and even discarding some already existing electric devices because “they are not efficient”. But what is already electric is automatically converted if the electric generation in the network is decarbonized, so that is a point to put the finger, right now. And not just energy companies decarbonized generation, but from heavy industries to private homes generation too. And if possible contributing the excess generated electricity to the network. And better than converting the 100% of vehicles to electric is rationalize its usage. More remote working, more public transport, electrifying everything of mass transport, better sharing, cities not built around having to drive for even buying a bottle of water should drop badly the need of so many vehicles. Then would be the moment of deciding what to electrify or not. And, of course, there is the lion’s share of emissions, that are not homes. That should be addressed too, sector by sector.

soco 3y ago
This article puts (as usual lately) all the onus on the little people - households in this case. No more paper straws, no more avocado sandwiches, accept pay cuts, I've heard it ad nauseam lately. But what's the plan with the industry, big agriculture, naval and road transports, everything else? Hypothetically if we disconnect all household consumers from the grid, would it make a dent in the climate goals? It would, sure, but such a minor one.
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  > But what's the plan with the industry, big agriculture, naval and road transports, everything else? Same plan: electrify everything.
- Glench 3y ago
  > This article puts (as usual lately) all the onus on the little people I sympathize with this view, but I think a change in perspective can be really helpful in soothing negativity and bitterness. It's more like we, as "little people", actually have some power to make a collective change that improves our climate and health. Around 42% of energy emissions come from consumers — transport, home heating / cooling, cooking, clothes drying, etc. We are not powerless! It's like the victory gardens of WWII — we can all pitch in together, including industry and government which can play leading roles. And actually we all have to decarbonize everything together or else our planet will continue warming disastrously.

soco 3y ago

This article puts (as usual lately) all the onus on the little people - households in this case. No more paper straws, no more avocado sandwiches, accept pay cuts, I've heard it ad nauseam lately. But what's the plan with the industry, big agriculture, naval and road transports, everything else? Hypothetically if we disconnect all household consumers from the grid, would it make a dent in the climate goals? It would, sure, but such a minor one.

ZeroGravitas 3y ago
> But what's the plan with the industry, big agriculture, naval and road transports, everything else? Same plan: electrify everything.
Glench 3y ago
> This article puts (as usual lately) all the onus on the little people I sympathize with this view, but I think a change in perspective can be really helpful in soothing negativity and bitterness. It's more like we, as "little people", actually have some power to make a collective change that improves our climate and health. Around 42% of energy emissions come from consumers — transport, home heating / cooling, cooking, clothes drying, etc. We are not powerless! It's like the victory gardens of WWII — we can all pitch in together, including industry and government which can play leading roles. And actually we all have to decarbonize everything together or else our planet will continue warming disastrously.