> If climate change is not a thing or not man-made, the worst outcome would be missing a few percentage points of economic growth by unnecessarily restricting energy sources.
It’s easy to be blithe about a few percentage points coming out of your bonus if you already live comfortably in the first world, but a few percentage points of economic growth is life or death for millions of people.
Considering how much money is being invested into the solutions, I would say that the change from fossil fuels will be great for economies and geopolitics. Specially since by going renewable/nuclear most countries are reducing dependence on crazy countries and may end up spending way less money on energy.
Those are all good reasons to support green energy (and I do), but I was responding to the patent poster’s worst-case scenario, which would in fact be bad, not just inconvenient.
It’s easy to be blithe about a few percentage points coming out of your bonus if you already live comfortably in the first world, but a few percentage points of economic growth is life or death for millions of people.