The issue is, that renewable energy requires a lot of rare earth metals. This bring a whole bunch of other issues. Politically and ethically. "In a perfect world it would be… " there is no perfect world. Humans never change.
EDIT: This comment is based on outdated information (see the below thread). A growing number of wind turbines are switching from electromagnets to permanent magnets, the latter of which use rare earth minerals. You could still make wind turbines with electromagnets, but that does likely give countries with rare earth minerals a competitive advantage.
Apprently my information is outdated. For a long time, wind turbines used electromagnets (the fact check is from 2016), but it looks like they are starting to use permanent magnets now (which require rare earths). They still don’t need them, and I think a lot of the ones using permanent magnets are from countries which have rare earths, but I will update my initial comment since I don’t want to move the goalposts.
In any case, there is a commenter above that mentioned solar, which according to my link does not need rare earth minerals.
I think the world bank report is a good read, regardless.
40 years ago? There was an article release in ~1910-1912 stating that burning coal was increasing carbon rates in the atmosphere. We’ve known about this for 100+ years. Theres always sentiment about jobs being lost / unstable energy grid… companies just trying to exhaust fossil fuels before switching
And the first electric car was built in the 1880s, so I think it’s fair to say that had people acted, it wouldn’t be as out of reach as the common person thinks.
We lived for millions of years without jobs. We’d be fine. In fact, We’d replace those jobs with jobs in renewable energy sectors.
Its insane to me that people argue that we should continue accelerating climate change which will kill far more people and cost more money than what we would make addressing and mitigation it.
But that would get in the way of your dumbass argument wouldn’t it?
The issue is, that renewable energy requires a lot of rare earth metals. This bring a whole bunch of other issues. Politically and ethically. "In a perfect world it would be… " there is no perfect world. Humans never change.
Modern solar cells and proven storage solutions like sodium ion do not contain these rare elements. Next!
Not wind with sodium ion batteries. EDIT: Source
EDIT: This comment is based on outdated information (see the below thread). A growing number of wind turbines are switching from electromagnets to permanent magnets, the latter of which use rare earth minerals. You could still make wind turbines with electromagnets, but that does likely give countries with rare earth minerals a competitive advantage.
What is the generator made of?
Batteries aren’t an energy source but a storage.
Here is a more direct link.
Apprently my information is outdated. For a long time, wind turbines used electromagnets (the fact check is from 2016), but it looks like they are starting to use permanent magnets now (which require rare earths). They still don’t need them, and I think a lot of the ones using permanent magnets are from countries which have rare earths, but I will update my initial comment since I don’t want to move the goalposts.
In any case, there is a commenter above that mentioned solar, which according to my link does not need rare earth minerals.
I think the world bank report is a good read, regardless.
What if you use a pully and have the generator on the ground?
not just that but that’s millions of jobs worldwide lost.
had we started moving to renewables 40 years ago, like we should have, the impact wouldn’t be as bad now.
40 years ago? There was an article release in ~1910-1912 stating that burning coal was increasing carbon rates in the atmosphere. We’ve known about this for 100+ years. Theres always sentiment about jobs being lost / unstable energy grid… companies just trying to exhaust fossil fuels before switching
hate to break the news to you…but renewable energy wasn’t viable in 1910-1912.
And the first electric car was built in the 1880s, so I think it’s fair to say that had people acted, it wouldn’t be as out of reach as the common person thinks.
Oh no…think of the economy! We have to keep accelerating climate echange!
let’s assume worldwide shipping creates enough jobs for 1% of the world’s population. that’s 70,000,000 jobs.
if half of those jobs (35,000,000) just poofed out overnight, what would be the global climate impacts after 6-8 months?
I’m willing to bet it wouldn’t be positive.
edit: sorry, didn’t realize I was on a slrpnk instance where emotions outrank logic.
We lived for millions of years without jobs. We’d be fine. In fact, We’d replace those jobs with jobs in renewable energy sectors.
Its insane to me that people argue that we should continue accelerating climate change which will kill far more people and cost more money than what we would make addressing and mitigation it.
But that would get in the way of your dumbass argument wouldn’t it?
Eh. Compare the investments and outcomes of New York Sun Solar Program and Pennsylvania Shell Ethane Cracker Plant.
In a vacuum, sure. Not when you look at the whole picture