Yes, and without the discovery of cubic miles of oil, we wouldn’t have had the energy and power to get to the point we are now.
You are looking only at electrical energy, and we certainly DO NOT have the capacity to keep our little planetary civilization going without fossil fuels.
Think of it like this: Even if you could travel back in time to 1850 with the knowledge of GaNFETs, 30%+ efficient solar panels, and lithium batteries, how would you be able to do anything about it?
How would you mine the enormous amounts of copper and other materials needed with the infrastructure of 1850: wooden carts, horses, and a few steam shovels as advanced and precious as a modern-day aircraft carrier?
How would you feed the people that are now no longer working in the agricultural domain without inputs of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides?
The reason is that knowledge without energy is an abstract idea.
So, yes, short term, all the rich parts of world will be able to pat themselves on the back about solar energy, but as your everyday household appliances degrade, where and how will you get the materials and resources to say, make a new washing machine?
Please don’t tell me you think we got to 8 billion people because of vaccines? Or that we shouldn’t worry and just keep adding endless mouths on this planet?
The thing is, there’s no need to rebuild the world from the 1850s.
We already have the required machinery and energy. We can make use of what we have, even fossil-powered, to speed up the green transition. Our only goal is to keep it going at a growing pace.
As per agriculture, there are sustainable solutions that I addressed in my other response to you. There are green fertilizers, and there are also genetically modified plants able to produce their own pesticides. There are also innovations in logistics and food sharing initiatives to make less food rot without use.
We have the knowledge, we have the energy. What we lack is the political will to shut down those standing in the way for their own gain over our collective future.
Yes, and without the discovery of cubic miles of oil, we wouldn’t have had the energy and power to get to the point we are now.
You are looking only at electrical energy, and we certainly DO NOT have the capacity to keep our little planetary civilization going without fossil fuels.
Think of it like this: Even if you could travel back in time to 1850 with the knowledge of GaNFETs, 30%+ efficient solar panels, and lithium batteries, how would you be able to do anything about it?
How would you mine the enormous amounts of copper and other materials needed with the infrastructure of 1850: wooden carts, horses, and a few steam shovels as advanced and precious as a modern-day aircraft carrier?
How would you feed the people that are now no longer working in the agricultural domain without inputs of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides?
The reason is that knowledge without energy is an abstract idea.
So, yes, short term, all the rich parts of world will be able to pat themselves on the back about solar energy, but as your everyday household appliances degrade, where and how will you get the materials and resources to say, make a new washing machine?
Please don’t tell me you think we got to 8 billion people because of vaccines? Or that we shouldn’t worry and just keep adding endless mouths on this planet?
The thing is, there’s no need to rebuild the world from the 1850s.
We already have the required machinery and energy. We can make use of what we have, even fossil-powered, to speed up the green transition. Our only goal is to keep it going at a growing pace.
As per agriculture, there are sustainable solutions that I addressed in my other response to you. There are green fertilizers, and there are also genetically modified plants able to produce their own pesticides. There are also innovations in logistics and food sharing initiatives to make less food rot without use.
We have the knowledge, we have the energy. What we lack is the political will to shut down those standing in the way for their own gain over our collective future.