4 ms·
While earnest, I’ve heard this claim for 30 years - that it’s simple political will. The reality is that until very recently there were only two economically vi
by lumost 1y ago
While earnest, I’ve heard this claim for 30 years - that it’s simple political will. The reality is that until very recently there were only two economically viable carbon neutral energy sources. We now have four, however there are real unsolved problems with scaling three of those solutions. The only technology which can reliably solve the crises brings along its own set of externalities.
It does few favors to anyone to underestimate the scale of the problem facing the world. There is no set of political body in the world with the capability to freeze consumption and lock billions of people into poverty.
- tfourb 1y ago„There is no set of political body in the world with the capability to freeze consumption and lock billions of people into poverty.“ I don’t think this is actually necessary to manage climate change (see my point advice above about the decoupling of economic growth and energy use). But just for the sake of the argument: „freeze consumption and lock people into poverty“ is literally what happens when nation states go to war and we have managed to do that plenty of times, including for really stupid reasons, without much of a problem. Governments are also quite happy to freeze consumption and lock people into poverty if they can somehow be labeled as undeserving and/or threatening. Plenty of that going around recently.
- lazide 1y agoIn many (very real) ways, it’s like saying ‘people are fat because they lack the willpower to control their eating’. Which, while generally true, isn’t going to solve the obesity problem anytime soon. Which I think is what you’re getting at.