solarpunk memes

3004 readers

214 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1101

If we switched to renewable energy (ponder.cat)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

108 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 45 points 2 months ago (1 children)

There may be carbon emitted in creating green energy but green energy is ultimately reducing demand for hydrocarbons, which is better than sequestration. Also you need to factor into the operational life of the green tech. If you do, it's pretty clear pretty fast that it's beneficial to go with green energy options. The argument you're making is a common strawman argument for not investing in green energy.

[–] HappycamperNZ -5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Interestingly you're both correct.

We swapped to ICE vehicles as they were cleaner than shit covered streets from all the horses, making a new problem.

Renewable energy is much cleaner long term- but what new issues are we not seeing? If we through ourselves head first into this (and we need to) what did we miss?

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm very much a proponent of careful planning and going into things with our eyes open. Sadly, I don't think we are in a position to know what we don't know or even find it out at this point because we are on a compressed timeline.

It's like worrying about the effects of fire retardant from the fire department's trucks, when your house is on fire.... and the other option in the equation is a flamethrower

[–] HappycamperNZ -2 points 2 months ago

Make no mistake, im not saying we should stop. Far from it. Only that we should have had these discussions 30 years ago, and don't be soo quick to dismiss the next tragedy to focus on this one - we just repeat the cycle.

You're right, the timeline is compressed from the 50 years we "thought" we had, down to literally months, and I don't think people actually realise that. Too bad most targets are 2050, 2060....

[–] mojofrododojo 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

If we ~~through~~ throw ourselves head first into this (and we need to) what did we miss?

literally the only way to know is to do it. same with horses. there's a 30 year transition period as infrastructure accommodates the world to the new technology.