3 ms·
This is a question of perceived cost and benefit. I do not actually think that the US would be undermining itself if it nudged the world's economy to transition
by mustafa_pasi 3y ago
This is a question of perceived cost and benefit. I do not actually think that the US would be undermining itself if it nudged the world's economy to transition to green technologies. I think it would protect itself and even benefit economically.
Not that I used the word "perceived" in my original comment.
- lazide 3y agoThe issue here is that ‘nudged’ doesn’t make the actual changes necessary. ‘Nudged’ isn’t transitioning anyone’s military off fossil fuels. Or international shipping. Or major capex outlays in things like home heating when existing (fossil fuel) options are cheaper and more effective, etc. Things that require double digit percent of GDP expenditures, which are often required. Germany tried (guilt perhaps?) and made a dent - but far from solved the problem, and is still consuming massive amounts of fossil fuels and is now burdened with debt and very high energy bills. They cut back from a case a day to half a case a day, and are clearly unhappy about it and far from sober.