4 ms·
There is a responsible way to extract and use fossil fuels as an interim necessity. The current model could not be farther from that path. The current crop of
by K0balt 3y ago
There is a responsible way to extract and use fossil fuels as an interim necessity. The current model could not be farther from that path.
The current crop of fossil fuel extraction companies need to be brought to heel by whatever means necessary.
They have shown overt enmity to the well being and perhaps even the survival of the species.
There is no measure at this point that should be off the table to deal with them, with extreme prejudice and any necessary force.
This is no different from an arsonist roaming free in your neighbourhood under the color of law. We need to collectively disavow their legitimacy whether by nationalisation, punitive taxation, or whatever other means may become necessary.
Additionally, the executives and even the employees of overtly hostile-to-humanity cartels such as the current incarnations of the fossil fuel industry need to be held socially responsible and overtly made pariahs within their communities.
They are much more harmful than any criminal or terrorist organisation in their current methodology, and society needs to deal with them accordingly.
- bequanna 3y agoOthers might say these companies are just giving people what they need and demand: cheap, easy to use energy. Instead of demonizing the current energy regime with petulant, ridiculous rhetoric, maybe that time is better used on building viable alternatives for customers. You can try to “Just Stop Oil” but currently without fossil fuels, the world stops.
- K0balt 3y agoIf strongly advocating for the well being of humanity in no uncertain terms is “petulant” and “ridiculous” then count me in. And if you were to actually read my post (which I assume you can?) you would find that I’m not advocating “stopping” oil, I’m advocating for responsible extraction with concomitant carbon capture or some other solution, of which there are many, aside from just making the survival of the species someone else’s problem while they stuff their pockets with money. Until that happens they are literally and knowingly stealing from the future of humankind for personal gain. The people also want murder for hire, heroin, and nuclear weapons. Should we also just say, “well, it’s what the people want, so I guess it’s just the wisdom of the market!” Should we allow these markets to operate uncontrolled as well?
- bequanna 3y agoThe “off with their heads” and “by any means necessary” rhetoric is laughable and yes, petulant. For better or worse, the modern world would not exist without oil. Your arguments are so far removed from reality that they are difficult to take seriously. Instead of funneling resources to counter productive efforts like building more armies of do-nothing government regulators and gifting trillions to the private sector via regulatory capture the focus should be on new efficient, competitive technology for electric automobiles, energy generation and storage. Particularly on cheap storage Carbon taxes and sequestration are simply someone lobbying for the right to make a buck while adding no value whatsoever.
- K0balt 3y agoOh. I see your understanding of the current situation we are in is somewhat incomplete. Frankly, that’s relatable. I wish that I also believed that greening current tech would at least buy us some time. For your own peace of mind, I’d recommend not to look into it too much.
- alach11 3y ago> the executives and even the employees… need to be held socially responsible and overtly made pariahs within their communities Or, hear me out, we could legislate a carbon tax that prices the externalities fairly.
- oceanplexian 3y agoA Carbon tax will never price externalities fairly, because we don’t have a world government, and therefore any country can simply opt out of the climate tax or lie about complying with it.
- alexvoda 3y agoThat is what international treaties and sanctions are for, the same way lifetime +70 year copyright terms have been forced down everyone throats.
- K0balt 3y agoIf we could actually do that, it would be exactly what I am suggesting. (Punitive taxation, since the tax would necessarily be more than the product value to offset current capture costs, so more than 100% taxation) The CO2 emitted from the use of a barrel of oil is about .43 tonnes per barrel. The capture cost is around 200 dollars per ton, so the tax would be about $86/bbl. Economies of scale would probably bring the price down, and petro companies would theoretically be incentivised to pour money into that industry, as long as it was allowed for them to verifiably sequester carbon to offset their tax liability. It would fundamentally change the relationship of these companies to humanity overnight. But I don’t see that happening so far, unfortunately.