> is not an engineering problem, it's a political problem
That's a political choice, and it doesn't have to be that way. You think it's a hard political problem because we'd have to make very hard choices (reducing quality of life) with the currently deployed technical solutions.
We could push along the R&D levels tech that's already researched, just not deployed (renewables and storage for their intermittent production like li-ion utility scale batteries), and research more some stuff that's barely researched (next gen nuclear, fusion).
Having palatable tech solutions would mean not making unpalatable political choices.
Having palatable tech solutions would mean not making unpalatable political choices.
The only answer is to tackle the issue from both a technological point of view and a political one. Waiting for someone to find a tech solution, and then failing to find one, will make things so much worse.
That's a political choice, and it doesn't have to be that way. You think it's a hard political problem because we'd have to make very hard choices (reducing quality of life) with the currently deployed technical solutions.
We could push along the R&D levels tech that's already researched, just not deployed (renewables and storage for their intermittent production like li-ion utility scale batteries), and research more some stuff that's barely researched (next gen nuclear, fusion).
Having palatable tech solutions would mean not making unpalatable political choices.