• Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Unfortunately, climate action is a collective effort globally. With him being in the pocket of Big Oil, expect no further investment into renewables and increased coal mining, fracking, and oil drilling.

      Anyone who cared about climate and voted for him (or abstained/voted third party) basically fucked themselves and everybody else.

      • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Anyone who cared about climate and voted for him

        i think that intersection is very small.

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Which is why I also included abstainers. Not large groups on their own, but enough to swing an election

      • Rhaedas@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        As well as changes to the EPA, NOAA, etc. Talking about climate change might become dangerous. Asking for help from FEMA may weigh heavily on how your state voted.

      • dontgooglefinderscult@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s nice, but Americans and American companies can’t afford non renewable energy. Trump needs to triple subsidies over the next 4 years to keep them competitive with renewable energy.

        Just a reminder, Trump is not more corrupt or well bribed than Texas, and Texas is one of the largest producers of renewable energy in the Western hemisphere. Money wins over ideology, and there’s a lot more money to be had with solar and wind given the now low upfront costs and nearly non-existent maintenance costs compared to all fossil fuels.

        • Sonori@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Counterpoint, Alberta exists and low costs benefit the consumer, not the company. I am fully confident that the profit made by oil and gas is significantly more than the tight profit margins in renewables, which means far less money to throw at politicians. Oil and gas can therefore throw much more money at Trump and still be in the black on their ‘investment’, even if you ignore that Trump has deep ideological and political opposition to renewables.

          • dontgooglefinderscult@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Renewables don’t have tight profit margins, you’re think of nuclear, maybe hydro.

            Solar approaches a 100% profit margin after 20 years, wind only ever gets to 90ish but still has the same timeline. Without subsidies, neither oil or coal gets profitable.

            • Sonori@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              No, i’m thinking of solar.

              Over decades a solar system will pay back itself many times over, but that’s irrelevant to the question of how big of a money pile can business throw at politicians in the here and now.

              That’s determined by the profit margin for companies manufacturing and installing them, which tend to be rather thin given the highly competitive nature of the market. No solar installer anywhere near the profit that oil companies are raking in, and the people owning the panels are usually paying off the loan to install them, using the profits to build more capacity, or saving, not buying off politicians.

              Without subsidies there would be far less profit for oil companies, which is exactly why it is so important for them to ‘reinvest’ some of their recent massive profits into continuing and expanding said subsidies and slowing down the adoption of alternatives. Buying off the government with its own money is a benefit since it leaves more for them.

    • federal reverse@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Chinese policy doesn’t give a shit about climate change. In fact, Xi is banking on a Northern passageway to Europe permanently unthawing to avoid the partly US-controlled South China Sea.

      Xi cares about staying in power until he drops in the 2030s, for that he neess to keep the country stable and the people quiet. So what he really wants is industrial power and rising welfare. He’s found that one of the best ways to gain an edge that is to spur useful innovation that wealthier nations will want to adopt.

      What this means is that we’ll see a lot of climate-friendly technology coming out of China, but the country may not care much about cleaning up its footprint.

      • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Even if you are right I’ll take doing the right thing for the wrong reasons over the fucking disappointment and self destruction coming from the United States.

        Doesn’t matter how you spin it, China is objectively better for the world right now.

        You can feel morally superior all the way to societal collapse

          • leftytighty@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            ok educate me. On the topic of climate in which ways has (or will) the United States be better? I’d appreciate the optimistic perspective.

            Does the argument extend beyond China bad?

                • 14th_cylon@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  well hello there, chinese intelligence officer.

                  we in the western civilization are usually getting paid for our work and don’t consider that as discreditation of said work. also, the author of the book, is, among others, researcher at Harvard, so he is the literal scientist.

                  Michael Pillsbury is the director of the Center on Chinese Strategy at the Hudson Institute and has served in presidential administrations from Richard Nixon to Barack Obama. Educated at Stanford and Columbia Universities, he is a former analyst at the RAND Corporation and research fellow at Harvard and has served in senior positions in the Defense Department and on the staff of four U.S. Senate committees. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the International Institute for Strategic Studies. He lives in Washington, D.C.