• fpslem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 days ago

    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.

    • somethingsnappy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 days ago

      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?

    • henfredemars@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

  • Floey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    14 days ago

    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.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

    • houseofleft@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      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”.

  • quixotic120@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    US laundering stolen taxpayer money into “eco” contracts thanks to nepotism and buying off politicians

  • Pennomi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    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.

    • copernicurious@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

    • Tiresia@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      Latest*

      It’s not even a particularly bad one, compared to Dole coups, Coca Cola assassination, and Uniroyal napalming civilians.

      • Sanctus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        There are no other bridges after the climate is fucked. This is the End of the Line.

  • ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    14 days ago

    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