> Unfortunate its hard for people to get 'economy of scale' > we have the investment<>expensive<>benefit hen<>egg issue. Maybe it's easy for people to get eco

> Unfortunate its hard for people to get 'economy of scale' > we have the investment<>expensive<>benefit hen<>egg issue. Maybe it's easy for people to get economies of scale AND path dependence. Unfortunately society has been put in a trajectory that maximized the profits of minerals rights holders in the industrializing US. And yes, we are in a sub optimal local minimum in terms of efficiency and need to go over a hump to get to better minimums and going over that hump may mean increasing carbon intensity of the economy for a while. Do we have time to do that though? Should we carbon de-intensify the economy and aim for a trajectory that minimizes climate related shocks or should we go all out on an accelerationist hope that we can bootstrap a better system by running the current one red hot? These seem to be the two sides of the debate we're in.