“If we want more growth, we need to allow creative destruction so new companies can deliver the productivity we need.”
Octopus energy ceo greg jackson
“If we want more growth, we need to allow creative destruction so new companies can deliver the productivity we need.”
Octopus energy ceo greg jackson
Back that up with some examples and i would be more likely to believe you
Examples that countries don’t ask for US permission to use non-fossil energy? Look at electrification grids for Switzerland, Norway, France, Germany, Australia etc. Look at their EV usage. Asking for US permission to avoid fossil fuels would be hardcore ridiculous.
My specific claim isn’t talking about the past year or past decade, but the past 50 years to be clear. The technology has existed to taper off of fossil fuels for a loooong time but we never did. Why? And don’t tell me it was too expensive. Everything is too expensive at first but economies of scale, innovations, and technological maturity drop prices. Solar is cheaper than gas and has been for a long time now. Same with wind… that could have happened earlier.
Theres a difference between token usage on your grid, or edge case countries like Norway that are all mountains and Fjords they can easily dam up for cheap power. Most of the countries you listed still consume huge amounts of fossil fuels and are delayed by decades on decarbonization. Why? You’re pointing to exceptions that prove the rule, also EV usage is a recent thing as the US empire is collapsing.
The US has historically obstructed global climate policy. The Senate’s 1997 Byrd-Hagel resolution passed 95-0 against Kyoto-style commitments. It said the US shouldn’t accept binding emissions limits unless developing countries also took on commitments thereby crippling their own economies.
The US never ratified Kyoto, and it has withdrawn from Paris twice. The US also promotes its own LNG and oil exports. They built the world’s largest petrochemical supercomplex in Louisiana. For the past 70 years the US has made money hand over fist by importing cheap shit oil and refining into products it sells back to other nations. Other nations don’t need to invest in refining capacity or deal with crude grades and markets, and the US earns money and a large part of their dollar backing demand by being the world’s refinery.
Additionally members of the International Maritime Organization voted to delay a global carbon price on shipping after the US threatened sanctions, tariffs and visa restrictions on supporters. Sanctions update
There’s also this how can this happen if Europe isn’t beholden to American interests? Why would the EU sign up to be even more reliant on American oil? If the US were instead a leader on decarbonization how do you think things would be different?
Do you need past US presidents to go on public television and say “We are opposed to any country trying to decarbonize” Or is a wealth of circumstantial evidence and direct evidence not enough?
How about you provide actual meaningful examples to support your counterargument. Address each of the claims I’ve made here because I think they’re pretty damning to your argument. Yes, the US doesn’t allow other countries to decarbonize.
Rest assured that one day, I will read that post of yours.
I think that’s a self report. If you read more we wouldn’t be having this conversation 🤣
Let’s hope someone reads it so your time doesn’t go wasted! In the mean time, look up how much renewable energy those countries I mentioned are using, you’ll be surprised at how much power they have and it isn’t because of a permission from the US!
I did… it was in my post that I assumed you were capable of reading which was a terrible blunder on my part