Two days ago, I was invited to contemplate the social cost of hydrocarbons by well-intentioned colleague. I invited them, in turn, to contemplate the social cost of no hydrocarbons.
As we are currently witnessing, when society or politics has to chose between the economy and the environment, the economy, which actually means fossil fuels, wins every time.
Thanks Jon. I was motivated to write this having seen a debate on the Base du Nord project in Canada that just got the green light. The critic (ironically in the present government) could just repeat "fossil-fuels bad, climate emergency" and not grasp the argument that oil is going to be used whether it comes from Canada or Russia.
It's fossil fuels + nuclear, or subsistence agriculture
Two days ago, I was invited to contemplate the social cost of hydrocarbons by well-intentioned colleague. I invited them, in turn, to contemplate the social cost of no hydrocarbons.
As we are currently witnessing, when society or politics has to chose between the economy and the environment, the economy, which actually means fossil fuels, wins every time.
Excellent post Richard, thank you.
Thanks Jon. I was motivated to write this having seen a debate on the Base du Nord project in Canada that just got the green light. The critic (ironically in the present government) could just repeat "fossil-fuels bad, climate emergency" and not grasp the argument that oil is going to be used whether it comes from Canada or Russia.