122
Report claiming net zero will cost UK trillions retracted due to ‘factual errors’
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
122 points (99.2% liked)
Climate - truthful information about climate, related activism and politics.
5243 readers
256 users here now
Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
even if it did, so what?
oh, saving the planet is too expensive, so we're just going to let it die to save money
We can all tighten our purse strings for a few years collectively (or the top 1% does it for like...a few months) or a select few of us can live in an underwater utopia built by our boiling slaves....................we're going to go with the slaves
I'll buy an apartment in "The Line". They'll have dinosaur robots!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Line%2C_Saudi_Arabia?wprov=sfla1
I guess you could say that the Saudis made a line in the sand
It's not finished yet. Just like many other grand projects they've started.
I realise you're being facetious and I do agree with your sentiment... But I guess if this was true we could/should look at potential other, cheaper, alternatives (like invest in more wave abs geothermal power)
If it cost 1000s of 10,000s a month to simply cook food, it would probably not be worth the cost to save the planet. That's how high they expensive they expected wind to be in their calculations.