zlacker

>>onnnon+(OP)
Just a contextual note -- one thing Sabine says is: AI won't help because we know the exact solution, we just aren't willing to do it.

Presumably she's referring to her first proposal -- a carbon tax. It's my understanding that there's nearly consensus among economists that a carbon tax is the most efficient solution to global warming, but political consensus that it would never happen when framed as a tax.

If you don't know what a carbon tax is, or why it's orders of magnitude more efficient a solution than "eat less meat" I'd encourage you to look into it a bit. Essentially if you create a system where what is best for the planet is also the cheapest course of action (for individuals and businesses), you no longer have to rely on convincing every single individual to change their morality/beliefs.

>>zug_zu+my2
It's finding a way to input the external costs of consumption of emissive products into their final price(s). In reality, a gallon of gas causes significantly more damage than the price paid at the pump - it was like $16/gallon when I saw a figure for it around 2010. Imagine how much differently a world with $20/gallon gas would look. There'd probably be massive pressures from all corners to move away from oil.

>>ianai+xz2
I am personally pretty opposed to taxing co2 emissions and playing games with carbon credit.

We should not be making energy expensive for the lay person.

Provide subsidies to build new solar, wind and nuclear farms - sure.

The world will quickly adapt renewable energy if it is much cheaper and convenient to use it.

In similar vein, for god sake don’t tax solar panels above usual tax rate. I’m looking at Arizona.

The biggest mistake any democratic government can make is life more expensive and miserable for their population.

That seldom goes well.