Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Mr_Hu-Man t1_ix2sc8h wrote

Actually you’re the one that sounds completely ignorant to the actual facts.

For instance, we do already have the technology to brute force it. A combo of wind, Solar, hydro, geothermal and nuclear fission alongside a robust storage system whilst electrifying what we can would be enough to get to net zero and beyond, plus carbon capture and direct air capture for the rest/reversing.

Secondly, the way I interpret your stance is “but future technologies will save us so what’s the point in caring enough to do anything now”. If I’m correct in that interpretation, that’s just dumb AF. Relying on some yet unpredictable technology versus a highly simulated and rigorously reviewed set of climate scenarios that all point to us needing to take action now to stop the worst effects is ridiculous. The result of taking action on climate change is a net benefit; new industries, new jobs, increased biodiversity and better water and air supplies, increased economic success due to the intrinsic link between nature and economies, adoption of circular economic practises which would keep our environments clean for future generations, less cost in the long run, etc etc etc - there is literally zero argument for not taking action that holds up to scrutiny.

Also, there wasn’t just one ice age, and we had more than rocks and sticks ffs.

I wouldn’t feel so high and mighty if I were you.

17

AsuhoChinami t1_ix2tbl4 wrote

I don't think your interpretation is correct, no. I don't think he's saying that. I think this is a topic you feel strongly about and it's causing you to jump at shadows a bit.

6

Mr_Hu-Man t1_ix2th8b wrote

You definitely could be correct, but I still can’t read it any other way than kicking the can down the road hoping for some unknown future tech to clean up a mess that we should have been cleaning up already

13

HeinrichTheWolf_17 t1_ix30als wrote

Human greed is a huge issue, the reason both the US and China won’t drop the coal industry is because of money, when you look at most other countries like France or Canada, the zero emissions goal with renewable energy is approaching fast.

You’re entirely correct, we have the technology right now. The issue is human nature and the desire for superpowers to remain top tog by spending less on energy costs. People always think about short term benefits and ignore long term disaster consequences.

5

sniperjack t1_ix40qlr wrote

i think the main issue is that oil bring a lot of cash to very few people which is use to corrupt institution or strengthening authoritarian regime. Renewable bring cash and growth, but it is a lot more spread out through a lot of different level of society which should strengthening those same institution and weakening authoritarian regime

2

MorningHerald t1_ix2tz3f wrote

> there is literally zero argument for not taking action that holds up to scrutiny.

Many countries are in deep recession and struggling to keep homes warm through winter, and energy prices have sky-rocketed with the poorest struggling for basic necessities - much of it exacerbated by a militant commitment to net zero at all costs. People are hurting now, and they need relief.

−2

Mr_Hu-Man t1_ix2u318 wrote

Please could you share an example of where commitment to net zero at all costs is exacerbating the situation?

Guess what: if we had a robust renewable system energy prices wouldn’t be through the roof.

6