There's an opportunity cost to everything you do. So if you prioritise carbon emissions and the result of that is that poor people can't keep their families war

There's an opportunity cost to everything you do. So if you prioritise carbon emissions and the result of that is that poor people can't keep their families warm, you lose. Most of the evils of politics in the first world happens as opportunity-cost theft, because it's easy to hide. For example - force people to pay taxes, enlarge government in the process, and then fund something stupid and thereby prevent the original person from putting it to better use. > Whichever side of the argument you fall [..] Be that as it may, if it develops as a result to market impetus you can be generally confident that it will be a response to actual demand. Whereas as soon as the government gets involved we lose our valuing mechanisms and get locked into what the geniuses in the capital think is going to happen. Also, it depends which fuels you pour your energy into and whether this is actually a good choice. If you invest in a bad route there for political reasons (e.g. ethanol) you'll have the effect of increasing world hunger as a side-effect. Nuclear is another option which is difficult to separate from political concerns.