bucfanclw wrote:DreadNaught wrote:I know we have alot of JRE listeners here, and if you're not than wtf are you doing with your life?
There was a recent episode with Adam Frank that was a great listen. I agree with alot of his perspective and disagreed with some. But he has a great 10,000ft view of climate change and what we as a species should do.
I'm paraphrasing, but his general take was climate change is going to happen b/c humans consume the energy on the planet and don't live in a homeostasis with the earth. He says there needs to be a technological breakthrough to transform our energy infrastructure b/c you'll never convince the countries that are sitting on TRILLIONS of dollars of fossil fuels to just leave it there in the ground. I think most people agree with that premise.
I enjoyed the listen.
This sounds like reasoning to invest in the development of alternative energies.
sure. and those that can, are.
you want more investment?
That comes from two places:
a) policy incentives- What's preventing more policy incentives?
- Money/lobbyists, driven by: human nature; self-interest in survival, using the capitalist paradigm available
- Lack of voter support, driven by: human nature; lack of interest in buying into collective action problem that they have little faith other humans will show same commitment to issue
b)
companies deciding to invest by themselves- What's preventing them from doing so?
- Not lucrative enough, status-quo still offers most profit, they have investors to answer to, who are beholden to: human nature; self-interest in survival, using the capitalist paradigm available
- In fact, the entire purpose is to maintain control over the status quo and to slow progress, to keep consumers in more "desperate", "needy" position. It keeps power in their hands.
What you have issue with is human nature, and the fact that this is the greatest collective action problem to ever grace this planet. Unless some benevolent leader comes along and commandeers the Exxon's / GE's (never going to happen), and absolutely forces their hand, there is not going to be any sort of benevolent uptick of investment in those technologies, until it is absolutely dictated to them by the market. And the energy sector is the largest, most powerful industry in the world - what makes you think they want to shake things up for the benefit of mankind? We're CONSUMERS. JUST. Consumers. They are the providers. It's a good dynamic right now. Why would they want that power balance to shift at all? This isn't just a trivial question - this whole premise defines every aspect of our lives. It's not just going to be shaken up by some ambitious politician. It's the most protected thing in the entire existence of mankind.
Saudi Arabia is just now beginning to diversify it's wealth (80% of its kingdom's richest come from oil), and that's ONLY because there is a vacuum in other industries that they are capable of filling (because its the relatively undeveloped middle east). It's not because they're making some benevolent move for the benefit of mankind. They're just trying to figure out how they can flip that oil money into selling more, different types of **** to consumers.
The change to better energy sources is going to be, by definition, a slow and painful process for the rest of us. It's the entire point.