In a way it already has been. China has invested so heavily into solar for two reasons: one was the crippling air pollution they were suffering but the other is that they rely almost entirely on foreign oil, and the Strait has long been a strategic weakness for them.
Their huge push into solar has driven down prices and improved efficiency for panels around the world, helping renewables actually become cheaper than coal, and a larger share of our energy generation than coal.
So to quote AI “you’re absolutely right!” And I think just the risk of what we’re now seeing has already driven this.
True, there are other compelling reasons some countries have leaned heavily into renewables. China, like you say. Also Spain and a few other European countries. Probably other ones around the world too.
I just wish that movement had more momentum to it. A massive factor in why it hasn’t taken hold more is because of lobbyists, corporate power, fear of change, and general inertia. Hopefully this situation with Iran is a fucking huge wakeup call to many with influence on this topic. Though I’m not going to hold my breath on that.
I think people don’t know just how successful renewables are. Taken together, they are now the single largest global source of energy, having displaced coal.
Of course, we want to see even more momentum, because while renewables have surged, so has energy demand, so fossil fuel consumption isn’t quite falling yet.
But I think you may have more reason for optimism than your comment suggests. Conservative lobbyists are not succeeding in killing renewables, except perhaps in shithole countries like Texas.
Power generation is predominantly coal and natural gas. Liquid petroleum, the base material for plastics, is used very little for electrical generation.
So do you want to explain again how using more renewables instead of coal and natural gas is going to drive up plastic production? I think your point is just reflexively pessimistic.
The switch won’t be instant though. There will be a lot more suffering from this kind of unplanned shift than there would have been from the kind of planned one environmentalists have been advocating for
We’re way past a smooth transition. War is never something that should be cheered on, but if this if the kick in the pants humanity needs to break free from oil, that would be quite the silver lining
Hopefully a push further into renewable energy will be a silver lining to come from all this.
In a way it already has been. China has invested so heavily into solar for two reasons: one was the crippling air pollution they were suffering but the other is that they rely almost entirely on foreign oil, and the Strait has long been a strategic weakness for them.
Their huge push into solar has driven down prices and improved efficiency for panels around the world, helping renewables actually become cheaper than coal, and a larger share of our energy generation than coal.
So to quote AI “you’re absolutely right!” And I think just the risk of what we’re now seeing has already driven this.
True, there are other compelling reasons some countries have leaned heavily into renewables. China, like you say. Also Spain and a few other European countries. Probably other ones around the world too.
I just wish that movement had more momentum to it. A massive factor in why it hasn’t taken hold more is because of lobbyists, corporate power, fear of change, and general inertia. Hopefully this situation with Iran is a fucking huge wakeup call to many with influence on this topic. Though I’m not going to hold my breath on that.
I think people don’t know just how successful renewables are. Taken together, they are now the single largest global source of energy, having displaced coal.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2rz08en2po
Of course, we want to see even more momentum, because while renewables have surged, so has energy demand, so fossil fuel consumption isn’t quite falling yet.
But I think you may have more reason for optimism than your comment suggests. Conservative lobbyists are not succeeding in killing renewables, except perhaps in shithole countries like Texas.
They’ll still use it to make tons of plastic though.
And animal cruelty will be totally unaffected.
All I’m saying is fuel/power is not the only thing it’s used for and if oil companies start losing money in one area they’ll ramp up another.
Power generation is predominantly coal and natural gas. Liquid petroleum, the base material for plastics, is used very little for electrical generation.
So do you want to explain again how using more renewables instead of coal and natural gas is going to drive up plastic production? I think your point is just reflexively pessimistic.
The article is about liquid petroleum.
Exactly, you cannot really affect a distributed source of energy the same way as oil.
You’re not thinking like a bully with a $900 billion / year military!
When oil is 200/barrel industry will switch out of simple necessity.
When it’s that high for years their hand may be forced. It’s a very slow ship to try to turn around.
The switch won’t be instant though. There will be a lot more suffering from this kind of unplanned shift than there would have been from the kind of planned one environmentalists have been advocating for
We’re way past a smooth transition. War is never something that should be cheered on, but if this if the kick in the pants humanity needs to break free from oil, that would be quite the silver lining