cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/16969151
I wasn’t aware just how good the news is on the green energy front until reading this. We still have a tough road in the short/medium term, but we are more or less irreversibly headed in the right direction.
Before anyone can answer the question: “Are we doomed?,” we must determine who “we” is, and what “doomed” means. If we take it to mean the near-term extinction of our species, there’s no reason to believe that will happen, even if the worst of the projected climate scenarios occurs between now and the end of the century. That being said, some people are doomed. Even under the most optimistic climate scenarios, sea levels will continue to rise, heat waves will become more severe and more frequent, as will wild fires, floods, droughts, etc. Some people will die as a result of these natural disasters. Which people? It’s more likely to be people who live in relatively poor, unstable countries, and less likely to be people who live in relatively wealthy, stable countries.
The long and short of it is: some people are doomed, but many, if not most people, will probably be just fine.
Really, the big problem are the instability from ripple effects. How will the world react to massive migrant crises and new, more intense conflict? To increasing economic recessions and the breaking away of old privileges? All things we are already seeing and that won’t go away anytime soon.
Now, total extinction of the species, yeah, that is very unlikely, unless something really unexpected happens. But throwing us potentially back centuries in progress, and killing a majority of people? A nuclear exchange from escalating tensions could create something like that.
All true but just fine again may depend on your definition. It’s going to cause major inconvenience for everyone at minimum I think.
That’s true, “just fine” can mean different things to different people. What I consider “fine” might not be for someone else. I also think it’s entirely possible what many of us consider to be fine might change with the climate. There might not be the same abundance in the future, meaning some people might not be able to consume as much as they do today. Of course, that’s not necessarily a bad thing as many people over consume today, to their detriment, so it might be good for them if they are forced to consume less. Unfortunately, in such a scenario the poorest and most vulnerable will probably be quite desperate and destitute.
I don’t know about irreversibly, but the remarkable and consistent gains in solar technology especially are extremely exciting.
As soon as one of these prototype next-gen batteries hit, that’s it for fossil fuel.
It’s already not worth it to continue using fossil fuel commercially, but as soon as the next-gen power storage is able to be produced on scale, power plants are changing, phones, computers, cars, everything’s going to change.
I can’t see that being more than a decade out, but even if nexgen battery tech doesn’t hit, the constant improvement on s***** traditional battery tech now is improving rapidly.
It is a very exciting time and energy production and storage.
Even batteries and wind have seen some pretty serious cost reduction. It’s looking pretty great for renewables.
I’m getting a little more optimistic about liquid air storage.
Fundamentally energy storage doesn’t have to be great if energy is so cheap. If you would lose x amount of energy otherwise only saving 80% or 50% or even 10% isn’t really a problem if the cost is so low.
Right now energy is getting so cheap that these systems are now making more financial sense.
Ooh, too bad big tech is devouring all that renewable energy (and then some) for forcing unwanted AI into our everything, making even more fossil fuel consumption necessary. That’s okay though. Over made my peace with our inevitable extinction.
That is uplifting news! Thanks for sharing!
