• MrMakabar@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For a lot of it there are working alternatives. Electricity is pretty obviously renwables and nuclear. For transport there are electric vehicles like trains and battery powered road vehicles, as well as not using them. Shiping is more difficult, but fuel can be saved using sails and electric ships are a thing. Heating and cooling can be done using heat pumps and district heating fairly well. Large heat pumps are also a good solution for quite a few industrial processes. For iron and steel production we do know how to do it using hydrogen for decades and there are a lot of steel plants using this, but the hydrogen is produced using natural gas. That is over half the energy related emissions we do know how to cut. There is even more then that, if you look at some other industrial processes, which emit, but are not huge sources. Basicly we know how to go most of the way.

    Also important to say that carbon inequality is massive. The richest 10% of Germans emited 29.6t per capita in 2020. the bottom 50% of Germans emitted 5.5t per capita. That btw is down from 13.9t in 1990. The 40% missing had emission of 11.9t per capita. Average emissions of all Germans was at 10.2t. Same story of every other country as well. So the rich are taxed much more then the poor. The only thing necessary is that the money is used smartly.

    • Robin 🐋@mastodon.ie
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      @MrMakabar the issue is that those solutions won’t be brought onboard before its too late, and as you identified, they’re the low hanging fruit.

      Taxes on the rich won’t discourage them from emitting.