• matlag@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sorry to ruin this dream, but not a single developed country (and most likely not a single non-developed either) has a remote chance of being carbon neutral in 10years.

    Reason number one is “carbon-neutral” is yet another greenwashing marketing idea involving emissions compensations that are just not there.

    We’ve seen now that planting trees will probably not do any good: we already see trees growing failure rate increasing due to excessive heating. They grow slower already, making all compensation calculations wrong, and they’ll burn in wildfires in summer, releasing all the carbon they captured.

    The second reason is the insanely high dependency we have to cheap oil. You need to convert haul truck, small trucks, buses, etc. to electric all while you turn the grid to 0 emission.

    You need to convert cargo ships to electric otherwise your net neutrality will need to conveniently ignore all importations and exportations.

    You need to convert all farm machines to 0 emissions and abandon quite a lot of the chemistry considered for granted today, which means yields will drop.

    You need to convert blast furnaces to alternative energies. Today, there is almost nothing done there other than “we’ll get hydrogen” that everybody know cannot be produced in the volume they need, let alone at an acceptable price.

    And no energy source whatsoever is carbon neutral!

    Solar panels need quite some metal and semicon-based manufacturing techniques. Wind farm need concrete for their anchoring, and use advanced materials to build. They both have a limited lifespan, after which you need to recycle (By the way: noticed that when “recycling” is advertised, no one mentions if it’s rectcling for the same usage and not recycled to lower grade material we can’t use back to produce the same device? That’s because we just can’t get them back with the same purity level…) and make some replacement, that will again have a share of emissions.

    Short of producing absolutely everything in the chains of supplies locally, you will import emissions from another country

    Any human activity is basically emitting or causing greenhouses emissions.

    And while you think all of that can be managed, we already have all signals to red on the natural resources: we can’t extract lithium fast enough, and we may not want to given how dirty the mines are. We may run out of some metals we rely on.

    And most of these issues are eluded in the great plans, because it’s too complicated or we simply have no solution and no one wants to say it up and loud.

    Now, the good/bad news: all of this will end because we’re also running out of cheap oil.

    It’s a good news because that will put a break in humans activities and so greenhouse gas emissions.

    But it’s bad because not a single country is preparing for the aftermath, and that means… they will collapse!