• 5 Posts
  • 313 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 19th, 2023

help-circle





  • What you listed is exactly means “impossible”. To be more precise “Practically impossible”. And really, batteries are not a answer, we simply can’t make enough to cover the need. But more realistic way to rid off coal, nuclear never get promoted by so called “green”. Be back to earth, plan for something which possible to achieve in next 10 years, we just do not have time for something which take 30 years to materialise. And oil have to stay anyway, but more as material than source of energy.












  • Nothing “knee-jerk” in it; it’s just pragmatic. The economy needs to run, and a strong economy is required to achieve any meaningful progress. The main problem is that many of “green” green lack knowledge (or pretend to lack knowledge) of the real world. They do tremendous damage to real “green” projects by advocating for “pipe dreams” instead of projects that could achieve something. Look at the anti-nuclear position of the “Green” party as an example (they should be pro-nuclear if they genuinely care about the environment). All their proposals are just hand-waving, which is unachievable and has no link to reality. And when you ask them, “What are the alternatives? Is there a real plan?” all you get are accusations or another “pipe dream”




  • So it pretty much means that bikes are only for rich guys who can afford to rent or buy within 5–7 km of the CBD. The problem with cities designed not for cars is that no one would love living in them. Multi-level unit blocks, no thanks; that’s not how people want to live. Good public transport could resolve that dilemma, but I do not see it happening.