Also, lots of state and local governments in the US have strong renter protections.
When the damage is presented in spreadsheets and charts its easy to ignore the cost, especially for those pushing the piles of money around.
Nuclear could be useful in applications that need a high energy load on-site, like steel, cement, and nitrogen production
I definitely recommend looking into some of Dr. Fowlers history, he’s such a cool person and his work with Crop Trust was so cool.
In 2008, the most likely projections had us around 4.5 degrees of warming. So, there is progress. Insufficient progress, we need to double down, but progress nonetheless
No, but it does change the implication. If leasing doesn’t lead to drilling, then it’s a pretty negligible concern
Overall, oil companies are withdrawing investment from exploration and new drilling. It seems oil companies are not drilling new but riding out on the investment they’ve already made plus utilizing market power to squeeze out profits. In terms of Biden’s political calculus, it seems that they think new drilling leases don’t involve much risk of increased oil coming onto the market, but it does improve his position among voters, especially in an era of inflation. Plus, this gave him political capital to pass the IRA, especially with Manchin.
This video goes more into detail of the economics behind this trend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AQbmpecxS2w
I disagree. To unlock workable solar and wind powered electricity, you need something to carry you energetically through the ‘tech tree.’ I simply don’t think you can get to that level of technology without some fossil fuel use.
To an extent, but we have the chance of transitioning into a solar and wind society and remediate that damage. Subsequent species would not have that potential.
Unfortunately, I don’t know if it would be possible for another species to reach our level of technology or civilization. We built up our society off of easily accessible energy resources (surface-level coal being our first source of industrial energy). This energy excess allowed us to develop other sources of energy, solar, wind, nuclear, etc. But if you tried starting from zero again, you could never get to this point, at least along the same path, as you need a high level of technology to access any available energy resources. Thus, if any new species took our place, they could only ever rise to the level of the pre-industrial revolution.
Nobody does maintenance in authoritarian regimes, either. It’s not a priority under any governance system
Highways were constructed in regions with sparse populations or in urban areas with little political power (primarily black and Latino neighborhoods). Basically, areas where democracy didn’t have to function because there was no democratic power to block it. Whereas nowadays, with higher levels of democracy (unequivocally good) and local control (more of a mixed bag), massive infrastructure projects are harder to accomplish. Plus, the 50s had the benefit of a booming postwar economy and the national cohesion (at least among enfranchised Americans).
I wonder if there’s any data on how much bus tires pollute in this way on a per-passenger mile basis. I’m sure it’s better than cars, but if it’s still a major problem, I wonder if there’s another way to manufacture less problematic tires. Maybe biodegradable?
I really hope this forum doesn’t fall down that rabbit hole
Lawns certainly have a role; hard to picnic or play soccer in tall fields of native grasses. Keeping a small patch as a part of ones landscaping is fine imo
The atomization of decision-making allows entrenched interests to disrupt progress. If you’ve ever been to a city planning meeting, you can see how NIMBY homeowners block transit upgrades or affordable housing. Sometimes consensus is impossible