(Replying to PARENT post)
Also note that much of the pollution in India and China is created in the process of manufacturing goods which are then exported to the west, so it’s not like you and I have no influence at all.
👤jl6🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Solar is now ‘cheapest electricity in history’
https://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-is-now-cheapest-electricit...
New solar is now often cheaper than keeping a coal plant running
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/23/most-new...
And we should expect solar to get even cheaper.
👤SideburnsOfDoom🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Both yes and no. If renewables and buffer storage become raw cheaper than fossils, then they will just be adopted.
But as of now coal is cheaper. And nuclear which is the natural bridge gap tech is politically unfeasible.
👤ReptileMan🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Also switching to alternative energy has a huge upfront cost in CO2 - producing all those windmills and solar panels costs a lot of energy.
If the time to turn things around is really so short, maybe that upfront CO2 explosion is not the right way to go.
Similar things hold for other things like energy neutral buildings - actually building them has a huge upfront cost in CO2.
👤horrified🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
This. And to be honest, luxury solution discussions and their waste of public discussion bandwidth are part of the problem. Financially support the building of thorium reactors in china and india- is part of the solution. Solar at home- is nice, but not part of the solution - as most of the carbon cost in the west has been carted off into the east.
👤PicassoCTs🕑4y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
Hopefully someday the tech becomes more affordable for poor countries and can supply enough energy for them to get through an Industrial Age.