Many politicians are more interested in protecting the coal, oil, and gas industries. Renewable energy and methods of extracting carbon from the atmosphere are the last things they want.
replyRemoval of carbon from the atmosphere is exactly what they want, because it gives them justification to sell more oil and gas.
reply[dead]
replyThe pragmatic answer is that it is probably a better spend of time to innovate tech that circumvents politics than to spend time winning politics.
replyA lot of the tech research and investment is done by governments, though.
replyYeah, because it worked flawlessly the last time we tried (crypto)
reply>I'm in my early thirties and I feel like i've heard about an "artificial leaf" every five years for the last fifteen.
replyYou have a good memory. Most people don't, so the ruse of living in a world with amazing breakthroughs works really well with most people.
Early seventies here, can extend and confirm your observation. Also flying cars, artificial intelligence, fusion power, equitable wealth distribution, ...
replydeleted
replyDecarbonizing is the biggest political project in the world. Enormous resources are applied to it.
replyI think the reality is there is no saving anything. Only surviving as long as we can. Why dump billions into an impossible goal of saving when we could invest in survival? I hope I’m wrong but anyone that knows anything about investments knows that there’s a point where you need to cut your losses
replyThe system of economics that we use is quite new on the historical scale, using it in your argument to say that saving earth based life (which we are apart of) is not financially viable is the most absurd thing in modern society. Without the ecosphere, the economic system ceases to exist... So by the very definition, it is the utmost important and therefore not only viable but absolutely necessary.
replyIt isn't clear what criteria is being used here for "saving" something. People often use "save the planet" to mean stopping most or all ecological changes. That very well might not be viable in which case survival ie adaptation is the other option.
replyPhysics places no such honorific obligation on the species.
replyThis just smacks of self serving “don’t end society I rely on” existential dread. While that booj materialism acts with indifference to externalities.
If the ramifications of there being no immutable force obliging us to preserve each other spread, omg. Then we roleplay out the reality daily with the lack of empathy driving us to the streets 24/7 until better healthcare legislation is passed.
As a culture we rhetorically make such high minded sounding rhetoric then equivocate away doing the work to live up to it. Got trite philosophy to post online don’t you know.