3 ms·

>If you are taking overproduced solar and turning it into methane/ammonia And that overproduced solar is made using... petroleum. The argument is very simple:

>If you are taking overproduced solar and turning it into methane/ammonia And that overproduced solar is made using... petroleum. The argument is very simple: we're basically just burning up oil with extra steps, then pretending the intermediate products can somehow undo the damage caused by burning up that oil (and now claiming that we're getting fuel back!) aka "extend and pretend" We need to stop putting that carbon into the atmosphere, because the reality is that the process isn't reversible on human timescales. The only answer seems to be degrowth, but asking for negative GDP is basically heresy.

foobarkey 2y ago
Your math is bonkers somewhere, solar panels can for sure capture more energy than ehat we used to produce them
- CapstanRoller 2y ago
  >Your math is bonkers somewhere Not my math. Industry's math. And it's bonkers because "green products" have to sell, electric cars have to sell, etc. The economy has to keep growing. Big Line has to keep going up. What doesn't sell, but might actually help us get out of this mess? Mass transit, dense subsidized housing, remote work, degrowth (negative GDP). None of this stuff sells, especially the last one. >they can I'm not arguing hypotheticals here https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-panels-are-more-carbon-intensive-than-experts-will-admit https://environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2023/7/3/solar-pa...