Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cbb330 719 days ago
> How far will the fossil fuel industry go to protect itself from climate impacts it helped cause?

As far as their customers take them :)

- sent from my iPhone which was delivered to me via fossil fuels

2 comments

I wouldn't blame the customer. If you put a pile of meth all over the food in a cage for a rat, its not like its the rats fault for becoming an addict or that they have any choice in the matter not to consume that meth. And if the rats start demanding meth are you going to point to the rats and blame them for being addicted or are you going to wise up and realize its inevitable given the setup?

To put it more simply in the words of Henry Ford, you can buy a car in "any color the customer wants, as long as its black." You don't get choice in the market place.

Humans have agency and self control IMO. People can and do regulate their behavior all the time.

I Feel like viewing them as rats without agency is extremely cynical, but also self contradictory. If we are all rats then let's act like rats and simply act on our most base desire. If you think people should try to do anything otherwise, then you admit that they have agency.

The market doesn't force you to buy a black Ford any more than it forces you to buy an F-350 with a lift kit and update the engine to roll coal. People choose to buy a car because it offers convenience, prestige, and they think it'll be better than not buying a car

I agree that it’s not the customer’s fault for buying and using what is offered to them. Furthermore, it’s not the producer’s fault for supplying it - after all, they are merely accepting money that is offered, acceding to demand. Spinoza figured it all out a long time ago.
So “safe supply” of drugs (meth) in your example, absolutely doesn’t work and will only get more people addicted? I mean, I don’t disagree but there is a significant amount of people who are pro safe supply
Equating a safe supply with intentionally dosing their only available food is kind of ridiculous.
One of the silliest things I have seen them doing is trying to refreeze parts of the tundra to stop oil pipeline issues. Literally trying to solve the issue they have a hand in causing.

But so long as it is profitable combined with globalized game theory of resources, this will continue far longer than seems rational.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/thawing-permafros...

>To safeguard the pipeline from possible collapse, the pipeline operator, Alyeska Pipeline Service Company, was granted permission earlier this year by the natural resources department to construct the passive cooling system to arrest the thaw of permafrost that is essential to locking the supports in the ground and keeping the slope from slumping or sliding. Alyeska is installing approximately 100 free-standing thermosyphons 40 to 60 feet into the ground. Construction is expected to take 120 days and will also include a three-foot layer of insulating wood chips atop the permafrost.