seems very pessimistic. Also, where is fusion? We should have it by 2100 !!!!
-
-
-
in the last 50 years we were just 20 years away from fusion energy, still are
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
"Arguments for devastation typically ignore adaptation, which will reduce vulnerability dramatically" How do we adapt to significant sea-level rises, given how many people live in coastal cities?
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
That's why CCU and regenerative agriculture should be the main focus now. https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/11/13/20839531/climate-change-industry-co2-carbon-capture-utilization-storage-ccu … Somewhat regulated natural gas, coal and cows are the main solution.
-
Now the above is considered as a synonym to climate changehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pI …
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Care to explain why the world will start burning more coal after 2050 when we have cheaper options?pic.twitter.com/8RPVqhwh3q
-
A lower price doesn’t make anything more efficient or productive.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
The UN has no clue. BEVs, solar, wind and batteries are likely to be far cheaper than fossil fuels for transport and electricity in the 2020s. And cheaper than everything but NG for heating. This means by 2030 or 2040 fossil fuels will be very small part of the energy equation
-
Maybe in the 2120s, but certainly not in the near future.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
80%? I bet it is way higher than that. Pretty much everything is n modern society owes its existence to fossil fuels.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.