The use of “unstoppable” is such a massively strange thing in this context. It somewhat implies that this is a bad thing, that should be stopped.
I think what they are trying to convey is that it is inevitable- it’s going to happen, and that companies holding out need to stop hedging their bets and jump onto the bandwagon quick
It is for the fossil industry.
Thing that drives me crazy is those assholes have had all the money in the world for decades to become global leaders in renewable tech and infrastructure. They know as well as anyone that fossil fuels are unsustainable and finite.
But nah, they’ll just keep riding this thing into the dumpster fire while gaslighting regular people about how our forgetting to turn off a light bulb is the problem.
Lots of people think like you do. Unfortunately half the population is below average in intelligence and not interested in solving long term problems.
deleted by creator
Their mindset is “Fossil fuels are still needed now, and if my company doesn’t grab them, someone else will” and it’s just so easy to continue getting those short term profits for their shareholders.
They may have long term plans for investment in renewables, but they won’t enact them until forced to (by government or market conditions). I imagine oil costs (and therefore profits) will skyrocket as it becomes more scarce, and they’d want to ride that all the way to the bank (and hell) before pivoting.
Basically, capitalism will be capitalism - its only moral is money. The only way is to have governments worldwide force them to change, and that ain’t gonna happen.
*Swivels around in chair* I’m afraid you are too late. The shift to clean energy is unstoppable!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The world is on an “unstoppable” shift towards renewable energy but the phase down of fossil fuels is not happening quickly enough, a new report says.
It praised the significant progress countries had made in expanding renewable energy and supporting consumers with the shift to electric vehicles and heat pumps instead of gas boilers.
It’s not a question of ‘if’, it’s just a matter of ‘how soon’ - and the sooner the better for all of us," said International Energy Agency (IEA) Executive Director Fatih Birol.
The report recognised that oil and gas would continue to play a role in the world’s economy and that maintaining investment was “essential”.
That compares with the pledge made in 2015 when political leaders agreed on limiting temperature rises to “well below” 2C and to make every effort to keep it under 1.5C, to avoid the most dangerous impacts of climate change.
But the IEA warned that it meant further uncertainty compounding an already unsettled global economy - Middle Eastern countries, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia - account for 67% of world oil reserves.
The original article contains 711 words, the summary contains 181 words. Saved 75%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Kind of a weak statement. I feel like it’s been a given that we’re going to end up there sooner or later; even if politicians didn’t want to ever go, the resources are going to run out sooner or later.
The question isn’t whether or not we’re going to go green, the question is how many people are going to die along the way before we get there.
this is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object
I read this as IKEA and I was like ‘well that’s a new direction I guess’
Great, so we should start reuptake now because it’s already too late. I know it’s a controversial subject and I know why but we better get used to the idea of it now because it has to happen.
Unstoppable other than by climate change killing the planet and all habitable spaces. But yeah, unstoppable.
According to estimates, PV including battery storage will be the cheapest energy source to develop for nearly every country in the world by the 2030s. Surely even the most determined doomsayers won’t go so far as to say we’ll “kill the planet” until then.
Except global warming, even if we went net zero today, is still gonna have temps rise for a long time. We’ll have to go net negative by a ton before we can reverse the effect.
Not to mention, cheap to make doesn’t imply full on adoption. Oil, gas and coal will still be in use around then. I’d love to be wrong here, but it costs more to change than to stick with what’s working.
The more pessimistic (already prior to this report unlikely!) projections of climate change are conditional on sustained heavy investment and development of fossil energy sources, which seems to me would make little sense if the alternative is significantly cheaper. So there’s now an even lower chance we’re in one of those truly apocalyptic timelines.
