you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Maybe. It doesn't make much sense that the same US government Republicans are preparing for the worst that could have just prevented it. Staying under 2C wasn't that difficult. The hardest part was getting China to go along, and that's gone reasonably.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

    Staying under 2C wasn't that difficult.

    Respectfully disagree. Ending fossil fuels is not easy. Technically, politically and economically.

    The hardest part was getting China to go along, and that's gone reasonably.

    ..China, India, Russia, Japan, Europe, Canada, the middle east, Australia...

    No one came close. China' progress is significant and in some ways commendable, matched only by their failures.

    https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/energy-statistics-data-browser?country=CHINAREG&fuel=Energy+supply&indicator=TESbySource

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    I don't think we'd have to fully end fossil fuels to stay under 2C. I think getting rid of them in power plants, road vehicles, and ocean vessels would have been enough.

    And that probably would have taken less resources than these data center rollouts.

    We could have kept oil in airlines and military.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    That would just have slowed it down not stopped it. Fossil fuels must end, one way, or as it seems to be the case, the other.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments