Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by noahth 2527 days ago
There is a strong economic argument for keeping oil in the ground now, though. Namely, that the planet will cease to support a functioning global economy under runaway warming.
1 comments

That oil could theoretically be burned and the carbon sequestered. Hence no climate impact.

The hazard to fragile ecosystems from an industrial accident is still huge.

Edit: the point is that some environmental protection actions have to be driven by moral/ethical forces. We can't leave everything to the economy.

Having said this there might be ways to use market forces to implement the ethically required environmental protections.

Well, if they can afford to pay market-rate insurance on the liability of their sequestration method then yeah sure.
Interesting thought. I know nuclear plants are required by law to set aside a part of revenue for eventual long term storage of the waste. You could have that for coal plants.

Of course we already have quotas and trade which is designed for something similar.

And the offsets have their problems...