• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    610 months ago

    That almost certainly is including private investment, which makes it a lot more possible. Especially with a lot of it replacing old fossil fuel infrastructure.

    • Ooops
      link
      fedilink
      0
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It doesn’t ewven need to when (by the article linked) those investments are one side of a plan that also includes saving 2.8 trillion in fossil fuel exports in the same time, while also projecting +2.4 trillion in damages if no climate action is taken.

      And that’s not even a new thing. We know that taking climate action now will actually save us money, short and long term. But it will also decrease the money paid by lobbyists to politicians and media and the profits of fossil fuel companies, so we will get headlines like these and a lot of political narratives to discourage us.