But the industry WASN'T fine. They lost a fraction of a fraction of a percent in profits by going for the cleaner, safer options. How can you be so heartless.

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 6 points 2 weeks ago

Clearly nobody has thought about the corpo parasite mate...

[–] considine@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

There is an issue of scale in that series. The first three are relatively small cost fixes. Addressing global climate change requires fundamentally reconfiguring all industry, globally at the very least. That's orders of magnitude more costly than the first three fixes. And it's orders of magnitude more difficult to get done politically, and engineering-wise.

But beyond that it may require massive reductions in consumption, trade and transportation. Possibly even short term remediation efforts like sprinkling silver dust in the stratosphere, which is estimated to cost in the hundred trillion dollar range.

I like that your comment shows that progress can be made against entrenched powerful interests though.

[–] monogram@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Nope all it requires is a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, that’s it.

[–] considine@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

So no one has to change anything physically? Just tax and poof? Neat trick.

[–] monogram@feddit.nl 2 points 1 week ago

Here’s the Wikipedia article on carbon tax it’s quite positive about it

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax