- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/9196136
What’s absolutely messed up here is the idea that people will burn the same amount no matter what. In a world where it’s cheaper to decarbonize, leaving a deposit in the ground will result in people finding ways to avoiding the need for oil int he first place, rather than drilling elsewhere.
You must log in or register to comment.
It is cheaper to decarbonize? Where? How?
This figure from the IPCC shows where it can be done very cheaply right now:
The “costs are lower than the reference” sections means that you on net, save money by getting off of fossil fuels.
All those examples cost initial investment. It is not a “people burn fuel no matter what” but “people lack the finances to switch to a long term cheaper alternative due to the high up-front cost”. Like a poor person having to buy cheap new shoes every year because they can not buy expensive shoes (5x the price) that last 10 years.
Here’s the thing: you can (and people do) borrow money for these things, and end up with the cost plus the interest being below the cost of burning fossil fuels. That’s how they’re getting done.
It all starts with getting non-trivial amount of cash. That is not an option for most people on this planet. Not even for everyone in first world countries. Hence the claimed “people just love to burn fossiles” is plain wrong.
So make the choice to avoid fossil fuels with every new appliance, car, power plant, and piece of equipment. You’re spending the money anyways.
I think you do not understand. If you have no money, you don’t buy new stuff. Especially not a new car. You buy whatever is affordable.
Yes, but a chunk of plant and equipment is replaced every year. If less oil is available, the people making that set of decisions change what they do.
deleted by creator