"me feeling cold"
"coal is cheap"
"burning coal makes me warm"
"coal good!"
Coal remains the cheapest energy source in the north. Only if you factor in the external costs, it gets expensive - but that factoring in is politics.
And there are already lots of people feeling angry and voting "alternatives" because they think the politicians made energy (coal) too expensive. Climafanatics is the term they use for people who say coal is very expensive in the long term .
You're about ten years behind on that claim.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source
Note the charts showing solar and on-land wind dropped past coal ten years ago and kept dropping while coal has flatlined.
Also note that nuclear is getting to be four times the cost of solar. And solar is still dropping.
And before you screech about "wHaT aBOut WHen tHe SUn gOES dOWn!1!", google "cost of battery storage trends"
Hint: it's dropped to one fifth the cost it was ten years ago. It dropped 15% this year, and that's with an increase in demand of 50%. Economies of scale and competitive pressures are causing battery prices to fall like a rock.
Think about that for a second: when Tesla Powerwall was introduced (2015) the batteries in them cost 5x what they do today.
But take away the regulations - and guess what happens.
Coal is condensed energy buried in the ground and cheap to extract.
Solar and battery is high tech, mainly coming from china with the domestic production allmost died out in europe. One global escalation and the solar prices will rise - and the coal will still be there.
I am arguing against blind optimism. Not against renewables.
If you look at the source above, you will find that the coal prices start to rise with the implementation of renewable energy laws and tighter regulation for coal plants.
In general, a coal plant is a quite simple technology, compared to solar panels. And if all fails and if you are cold, you can just burn them. It is for a reason, that german slang for money is "coal" ("Kohle").
Coal to run a power plant, via turbines, is significantly more complicated than solar panels.
A modern high tech coal plant maybe, with all the digital control, automation and filters maybe. But the basic tech is from the 19.century. A average metal workshop could build one with some time.
But solar panels? That requires high tech in all of the production steps.
The key difference is that operating a coal power plant involves a logistics chain from a coal mine in a desert in Australia, and operating a PV plant involves wiping dust from the panels. One global escalation and the logistics chain is in trouble — while the panels will still be there.
And there’s trash burning power (with district heating). Norway, Sweden and Denmark has a few of those. Possibly others in the region as well.
Humans suck around this urgent transformation need, but renewables and storage are a freight train that can’t be stopped, based on all available evidence.
I think I am as optimistic as one can be, without closing my eyes to the reality on the ground. Where I live, the AfD got 40% of the votes. And further east, poland and co. are not that keen on phasing out coal, either.
Thinking coal is definitely going away, because some letters on a paper currently says it will happen, is dangerous I think. It will go away if there is continiously active support for that transition. So far china is also still building lots of coal plants, despite their solar panel production.
Eg I bet on the President that would be worse for me a decade ago. Winning some money took off all the sting
Maybe my english was bad.
To be clear:
I want burning coal gone as soon as possible.
Betting that it isn't going away would give me incentive to activly work against the banning of coal. Why should I do that?
edit: but reading more carefully, yeah, that is what you mean. "Winning some money took off all the sting" Well, that is cowardly I think. Betting on both outcomes. I rather invest what I have in the desired outcome, where my consciousness is. Otherwise my motivation would be less. Because I personally would win this way, my reptilian brain likes immediate payout.
"and guess that you have approximately zero impact on coal consumption"
And we will see about that in 10 years.
Genuinely curious if some people think this way.
Not swayed, but definitely influenced.
Every positive and negative outcome of every scenario gets evaluated and our actions result from on this evaluation. Changing some factors changes the outcome.
The details are obviously very complicated and the process far from understood, but the principle is quite established I think.
So I do not want to influence my motivation even a tiny bit in a direction I do not like.
edit: Hypothesis, many problems exist, because too many people bet on things they do not want, but might make money. So less investment in actually changing it.
There is no need to worry about putting a feather on a scale if the other side has an elephant.
True, but I think the scale here is a bit more complex.
Climate change is a quite abstract threat for the brain.
Feeling cold feels very real on the other hand.
So doing things here and there might add up. Even feathers have weight.