In a strategic retreat in the fight against climate change, the United Nations has acknowledged that Earth has lost its chance to prevent some of the worst of global warming’s harms
In a strategic retreat in the fight against climate change, the United Nations has acknowledged that Earth has lost its chance to prevent some of the worst of global warming’s harms
Electric vehicles exist. Of course they would be used instead. Remember, I was asked to “consider there is no opposition but physics.” That includes logistics. I’m not glossing anything over, I’m following the rules.
I understood that to mean no political/societal opposition, not that we don’t also have our current physical reality to factor in. Sure, in a scenario of unlimited resources we can wave a magic wand and pluck up anything we’d need that is physically possible. But in our real world there aren’t sufficient electric vehicles to replace all the transport and agricultural ICE vehicles that are currently needed And our electricity grids aren’t able to operate independently of fossil fuels to provide enough power, even to produce the missing EVs. If we shift to a permaculture system of growing food, we’d need 10x the amount of land on earth, without taking into account the quality of the land. And if we took all of the nitrogen that the earth naturally produces, we’d be 50% short of what we’d need for the current population. We really want to underplay how much fossil fuels do for us. So saying there are electric vehicles, therefore problem solved, without taking into consideration the actual real world logistics, seems like make believe to me. In which case, I’m not sure what the point of this exercise is.