War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

Post by JumpCrisscross » Tue, Feb 14, 2023, 2:43 PM UTC

pydry wrote: post #120

usrusr wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If an article about investment in swimming classes that was boosted by a series of drowned children, and praises those classes for how they also increase overall health and fitness, the article is pro-drowning?

There have been some Russian articles indicating that the Ukraine war gave a boost to the Russian economy, which is why it grew this year. They were exhibiting nothing more than a purely objective opinion based upon the purest of evidence of course . Many Russians would believe that the idea that an article like that used spurious evidence to push a pro war agenda absurd. Like being pro drowning, as you put it.

Post by pjc50 » Tue, Feb 14, 2023, 2:50 PM UTC

yyyk wrote: post #151

The article's conclusion may be distasteful to some, but is in line with historical precedent. The 1973 Yom Kippur war and following oil embargo led to fuel economy standards, CFL research was started, search for alternate fuel sources and extraction method such as fracking... Many parallels to today, except "green" sources barely existed at the time.

Post by pfdietz » Tue, Feb 14, 2023, 2:56 PM UTC

stef25 wrote: post #119

jacquesm wrote: post #55

Just one datapoint: this war has motivated me to make at least this house as independent of external energy sources as possible within the limits of physics and my budget. Gas prices have gone up so far and so fast that freestanding houses are listed for sale all over the place here. I've installed a relatively large amount of solar (nominally a bit over 10 KW) and I'm using that to offset the gas bill as long as we…

Good insulation (floor, ceiling and all walls) and properly fitting doors and windows already goes a long way. My apartment was renovated this way and when you turn the heating on when you come home the place is up to temp very quickly. A lot of houses have badly fitted windows & doors. Put your ear near it and clearly hear sounds coming in through little gaps, or even feel a small air current.

Post by user3939382 » Tue, Feb 14, 2023, 2:59 PM UTC

staunton wrote: post #68

user3939382 wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My opinion is that The Economist is looking for any angle to support the fleecing of the American people to the tune of $130B which we just handed over to the arms industry. The war was crafted by this industry through its puppeteering of the US government for expressly this purpose. The Economist might as well write an article about the long-term positive impact on the planet of humans being obliterated by the nucle…

Which again is an opinion on the source and does not mention the content in any way. I must conclude that you're not interested in an object level discussion about the topic at hand.

Post by trasz3 » Tue, Feb 14, 2023, 3:07 PM UTC

hackandthink wrote: post #180

_kbh_ wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is about cost/benefit. This is truer then you know, the world must make the cost of Russia trying to take over another country so expensive both financially and militarily that they do not try this again. Don't forget Ukraine is not the first, Russia has invaded and sometimes even entirely annexed countries in the past. > If Ukraine would tell: We are looking for a compromise (no NATO membership, Crimea belongs…

Maybe I'm wrong. But I think John Mearsheimer got it right in 2014: "Next, Putin put massive pressure on the new government in Kiev to discourage it from siding with the West against Moscow, making it clear that he would wreck Ukraine as a functioning state before he would allow it to become a Western stronghold on Russia’s doorstep." This is happening now. "Russia wants all of Ukraine, they want to subjugate them co…