• TaterTurnipTulip@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    But the fun thing is that all solar currently has a carbon cost associated with it. So as we’re trying to work our way out of this we’re also continuing to increase the carbon load. It’s a vicious cycle.

    • piecat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      But the fun thing is that once we reach a critical point, it will go from having a positive carbon impact to a negative carbon impact. But we can never get there if we never start

      It’s all about scale and infrastructure.

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yes, but if it takes a thousand years and we’re all long gone from all the positive carbon impact? I agree with you but think the narrative is dangerous. We can’t think “well in the long run”, we need to actively counter the positive carbon right now (as in this year) and increase other negative carbon policies like mass transit and reducing subsidies. “It’ll work out in the end” is what got us here.

        • piecat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 months ago

          I don’t see your point.

          Building fossil fuel power infrastructure does nothing to move the needle, but building renewables does.

          What are you actually proposing? Because it reads as “we shouldn’t try because any benefits or impacts are long-term”

          • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            I was wondering what the controversy was with my comment lol. I was just saying that relying solely on renewable energy and current technology to be widely developed and implemented to reach net-zero carbon will be a slow-meticulous crawl while we continue to pollute the earth with our current infrastructure (fossil fuels). We need to also continue to push for policies like more use of public transportation and stop subsidizing the oil and gas industry so people actually feel the cost associated more. People see things like bike lanes and busses/rails as a more viable option when it actually effects them. You’ll see more people walking to nearby locations or doing “greener” activity when the actual price of 8$ or more a gallon becomes a reality.

            If you start telling people, “oh, well just get more panels and use AC.” They’ll take it as nothing needs to change in their habits and all the other industries are fine as they are. Much like the “recycling” program in the 80’s and 90’s was used to manipulate the public that they are responsible for all the garbage and toxins being produced.

    • Blackmist
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      But we’re not just piling more and more on the grid. It’s replacing something worse, and those things wouldn’t last forever anyway.

      The last coal power station in the UK is due to shut down in a month or so. Within a year or two it will be demolished. Would we be doing that without solar and wind? No.

      Just existing has a carbon cost. It’s our duty to keep it low.