• Track_Shovel@slrpnk.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    2 days ago

    There may be carbon emitted in creating green energy but green energy is ultimately reducing demand for hydrocarbons, which is better than sequestration. Also you need to factor into the operational life of the green tech. If you do, it’s pretty clear pretty fast that it’s beneficial to go with green energy options. The argument you’re making is a common strawman argument for not investing in green energy.

    • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 days ago

      Interestingly you’re both correct.

      We swapped to ICE vehicles as they were cleaner than shit covered streets from all the horses, making a new problem.

      Renewable energy is much cleaner long term- but what new issues are we not seeing? If we through ourselves head first into this (and we need to) what did we miss?

      • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 hours ago

        If we ~~through ~~ throw ourselves head first into this (and we need to) what did we miss?

        literally the only way to know is to do it. same with horses. there’s a 30 year transition period as infrastructure accommodates the world to the new technology.

      • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.netM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 days ago

        I’m very much a proponent of careful planning and going into things with our eyes open. Sadly, I don’t think we are in a position to know what we don’t know or even find it out at this point because we are on a compressed timeline.

        It’s like worrying about the effects of fire retardant from the fire department’s trucks, when your house is on fire… and the other option in the equation is a flamethrower

        • HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          Make no mistake, im not saying we should stop. Far from it. Only that we should have had these discussions 30 years ago, and don’t be soo quick to dismiss the next tragedy to focus on this one - we just repeat the cycle.

          You’re right, the timeline is compressed from the 50 years we “thought” we had, down to literally months, and I don’t think people actually realise that. Too bad most targets are 2050, 2060…