Hacker News Reader

Comment by imglorp | Hacker News Reader

Gas is also laden with hidden costs. In particular, bad things happen when drilling shale and then more bad things building and running pipeline transports such as Dakota, Keystone, and Mariner. These things are all getting rammed through legislatures in a manner that bypasses all of the normal democratic process.

For example, Mariner East somehow got declared a public utility which gives Sunoco rights to eminent domain whatever they want along the route to maximize profits with minimal oversight. They ruin neighborhoods and property values, literally bulldozing through apartment complexes, under schools, through little league fields, contaminating aquifers, causing sinkholes, and this is before anything is pressurized. There are no disaster plans like you see for nuclear plants. All these downsides so Sunoco can offshore the product.

Late stage capitalism.

View on HN

What gas doesn't suffer from though is expensiveness (environmentalism sounds great until you realize you're largely advocating economically regressive policies that disproportionately impact the most vulnerable) and scalability. EU countries might be able to run their industrial sectors on renewables but call me when Russia, India, China, Indonesia, Brazil or even the US are able to do it without costs going up.

> environmentalism sounds great until you realize you're largely advocating economically regressive policies that disproportionately impact the most vulnerable

Global warming is going to 'disproportionately impact the most vulnerable' even more. (Is there anything at all that won't? People with fewer resources have fewer options in dealing with new challenges, this seems like a fundamental fact.)

> Is there anything at all that won't?

Yes. Decline in stock prices or real estate for example.

> People with fewer resources have fewer options in dealing with new challenges, this seems like a fundamental fact.

Yes, that's almost true by definition.

Even in my examples, in general the people who start out rich will still be better off after a stock market crash than the people who started out poor.

Look on the bright side though: by symmetry any disaster averted or condition improved also helps the vulnerable more.

Decline in stock prices often indicates issues with the economy which also result in companies trimming the fat across the board. This usually hits the more fungible staff first. Likewise, decline in real estate will force rental property owners to sell up, reducing the supply of rental properties - good news for renters looking to make the jump to home ownership but less so for anyone not in that position.

True that rich people (if they're not being stupid with their money) will be better positioned to buy cheap stocks after a crash and will multiply their fortunes in the long run.

I like your bright side.

> Likewise, decline in real estate will force rental property owners to sell up, reducing the supply of rental properties - good news for renters looking to make the jump to home ownership but less so for anyone not in that position.

Shouldn't make too much of a difference? The total number of houses and households stays the same after the sale. Basically, you are right, for every such transaction you describe, one rental unit is taken off the rental market, but also one household exits the rental market, too.

The most vulnerable (Africa) live in water starved regions that will be seeing increased rainfall.

Also swarms of locusts. :S

Is there a reason you feel this isn't an issue that could be attacked more efficiently either way by engaging it in the same manner that many institutions are currently engaging research research into reducing mosquito populations? Surely the west owes them that much after systematically sabotaging an entire continent. Or is it alright when it's part of the natural status quo?

Nope - sub Sarahan Africa is getting drier.

Is there a reason you feel this will hold true over time despite the region's relative proximity to Antarctica and its broad exposure to the intertropical convergence zone?

As of 2018, renewable energy accounted for 79% of the domestically produced electricity used in Brazil.

Brazil relies on hydroelectricity for 65% of its electricity, and the Brazilian government plans to expand the share of biomass and wind energy (currently 6%) as alternatives.

From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Brazil

A good point, I was lazy and mainly did a population survey, I was wrong in assuming Brazil was significantly industrialized. I'm not sure that helps your point much though since eventually they're going to want their economy to grow unless your position is that Brazilians don't want their economy to grow.

I'm not sure that helps your point much though since eventually they're going to want their economy to grow unless your position is that Brazilians don't want their economy to grow.

There was no point other than to identify the error in your proposition.

I'm unsure about industry, but at least for residential use gas won't be going away any time soon in Europe. In the UK 86% of houses use gas as the fuel for their central heating system, and even more use it for cooking and heating hot water. From 2025 in the UK new houses will not be allowed to use gas for heating, but it's still going to be a long time until all the old properties are retrofitted.

For new builds a heat pump + solar is the smart choice - they cost more upfront but the lower costs win in the long term (after 15 years or so, without grants). The problem is older properties don't have the same level of insulation as new builds, so even if there are grants for replacing the equipment it's going to be a long time until it pays off. It depends how big the grants are though, if a government is serious about going green then it's a worthwhile investment.

Pretty sure even small domestic increases in gas prices will help speed that along. Already my energy bills have increased considerably across the last 10 years - if they carry on like that, and electricity becomes the cheaper way to run my house, I'll change in a shot. If the costs (£2k ish for a new gas boiler and fitting) are similar, then I'm sure when will. If adding solar and/or heat pump will bring my costs down then awesome.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com