|
|
|
|
|
|
by PhaseLockk
2524 days ago
|
|
|
> The company already has cut emissions substantially, at the cost of $1 billion so far. And it has an intermediate goal to cut emissions by 60% (relative to 2008 levels) by 2030. > While 2050 might sound a long way away, ships are built to last for 20 to 30 years. That means container ships that will be in service in 2050 will be hitting the oceans in just a few years. These quotes from the article make it seem like there needs to be some fairly drastic action in the short term which would demonstrate how serious they are. The main suggestion for "how" seems to be biofuels. |
|
|
Well, the answer is not as easy as "biofuels". Where do the "biofuels" come from (e.g. cow shit might have enough energy if filtered correctly, but we already have too many cows on this planet with direct impact on the environment)? How are the fuels processed? How much of the final output is from device and material production and how much from actual usage? Think solar power here. For quite some time (I hope not anymore) the emissions produced while making solar panels was bigger than the savings the solar panels generated.
So the problem is quite complex actually. It would really make sense to set shorter intermediate goals and show how they can be accomplished in a competitive market. If they become the goodest good guys and then lose for not making a profit the world isn't better off either.