The complete phasing-out of fossil fuels is not realistic, China’s top climate official said, adding that these climate-warming fuels must continue to play a vital role in maintaining global energy security.
The complete phasing-out of fossil fuels is not realistic, China’s top climate official said, adding that these climate-warming fuels must continue to play a vital role in maintaining global energy security.
Doesn’t matter, if they’re still gonna burn coal I shouldn’t have to switch to renewables either, or at the very least not on the quick timetable. Either all in or not at all, it’s not like the effects above 2C aren’t going to kill everyone anyway
What an idiotic sentiment
Unfortunately it’s an easy sentiment to promulgate. It taps into feelings of fairness and justice. Those are some very foundational emotional drivers for humans
However, I think there’s a chance to turn that sort of reasoning around. Like if we appeal to the idea of right and wrong. If using fossil fuels is like stealing or assault or worse, then the fact that someone else is doing it doesn’t suddenly make it ok. It makes the person doing it a bad person.
The problem with fossil fuel use currently is that so many people are using them and whole countries and ways of life have been built around using them. Getting rid of fossil fuels has the potential to be as disruptive as getting rid of slavery.
Effects above 2C will not, in fact, “Kill everyone.” The idea that this whole thing is some binary condition between “Everything is fine” and “Everyone dies” is complete nonsense. Every fraction of a degree we reduce or prevent will make a difference to survivability and quality of life for people all across the planet.
It all matters (in the sense that every country, big and small, should be trying to decarbonise; obviously, those efforts should be targeted on billionaires and massive pollution driving industries where we’ll make an actual difference, not completely ineffectual headline grabbed like plastic bags and drinking straws).