this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2023
345 points (94.3% liked)
Technology
59421 readers
2852 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
He should have added the caveat that global price instability is causing most of that pain. The carbon tax is only a small component.
But also, the middle class can afford heat pumps. So they will never be in such a situation.
And also also, turning the thermostat down one or two degrees saves a lot of money and is healthier and more natural.
Sure, some people get spooked, but that's mostly due to fear and uncertainty, not due to facts.
Anyway, the author does make two mistakes: ignorance about nuclear and unrealistic expectations about the future revenue of carbon pricing.
As the price goes up, revenue will go down, as less people emit carbon.
Nuclear is not going to happen. Not without governments deciding to fund plants 100% up front. The economics just don’t make sense.
Not anymore.
You must be living in a different reality.
Even Japan is restarting their nuclear plants, while Fukushima is still in living memory.
Restarting is fast and cheap.
Building takes a decade and another one before you break even. How positive are you that you will be able to operate that plant until the end of its economic life?
Are you willing to bet a few billions on it?