Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by garyrichardson 1754 days ago
I 100% agree with this view. Its not practical to go cold turkey as people would freeze and starve.

It’s one of the reasons I’m anti-pipeline. I’m generally against anything that makes it easier to get and distribute fossil fuels. Adding friction is an alternative way to internalize the cost of fossil fuels.

2 comments

"I 100% agree with this view. Its not practical to go cold turkey as people would freeze and starve."

Not sure if I was clear that my view is the opposite of what you are saying. I believe much fewer people would "freezer and starve" than expected because we suddenly would get very, very industries about finding alternative solutions. We would get through a short period that's super super tough but quickly would end up end par or better than our current circumstances. What's more, I believe that it's much easier to go through tough times collectively than individually. This is often true in war and natural disasters and night be true if we go cold turkey, as long as we do it together.

What happens instead is just that people use trucks to move the oil, instead of the more efficient pipelines. That makes it somewhat more expensive, which makes the oil somewhat less useful economically, and therefore somewhat less used. On the other hand, the trucks pollute more than the pipeline would have.

Are you sure your approach is helping?