US squandering billions on unproven climate solutions, critics say
US squandering billions on unproven climate solutions, critics say
Subsidies for technologies like carbon capture and storage are a “colossal waste” and bolster polluting industries.
-
Put a fraction of that in wind, solar, or forced geothermal, and you'd get a real benefit. But the fossil fuel industry demands a fig leaf to cover its naked greed, so here we are.
-
All we hear about is we don't have a smart grid, and can't a agree on storage. So, how about we put some of the billions into that?
-
Right on the money. I think wasting funds on solutions that don’t work is the point, if only so someone can point a finger and say look we tried (bad idea) and it didn’t work. Our bureaucratic strawman proves that climate changes is inevitable.
-
-
We are allergic to exploiting great solutions that already exist. Everyone wants to be "disruptive".
It reminds me of the investment that went into hyperloop stuff when our current best transit solutions aren't anywhere close to full saturation in the US. Similarly our current best green technologies are far from being fully exploited.
-
Also, part of the issue is real green technology requires some people to change their business and/or lose some profits. If we do carbon capture or other things, that creates a product to sell. It's a bullshit product that is worse than other options, but if they can it's easier for politicians to sell this to donors than something that'll hurt a very rich industry. Syphon money from taxpayers to make sure the rich dirty energy companies can keep making huge profits and give the tax money to some other rich people to clean up the thing the other guys are doing.
-
This is so true!
I think people are so in love with the idea of "innovation" because secretly we all just know that it means "easy-fix" and that sounds a lot better than "hard work".
-
-
US laundering stolen taxpayer money into “eco” contracts thanks to nepotism and buying off politicians
-
I don’t think that is wrong to subsidize research of new potential technologies that will help is control our carbon output… as long as we are also rapidly moving towards renewable energy.
Obviously most research runs into dead ends, but that doesn’t mean we should stop trying new things.
-
The article is poorly written and vague, but I think much of the money is subsidizing projects rather than funding research. Basically supporting Exxon (mentioned in article) and others in installing CCS systems on their refineries and power plants.
-
-
Yeah but this way the fossil fuel industry and a handful of dipshits in silicon valley make a lot of money so fuck the earth