Live data from Hacker News

War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

economist.com

221–230 of 231 posts

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#221
post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No country deserves to be ethnically cleansed. I meant "western" geographically here. I'm sure Russia won't invade the Baltics. But I'm not sure that Russia will never invade Azərbaycan. (Azərbaycan has oil and is not in NATO and frome time to time they attack Armenia or Armenia attacks Azərbaycan). I remember the second (Putin's) war in Tschetschenia. I've known since 20 years that Russia/Putin is ruthless. How to d…

>How to deal with Russia? I actually opt for appeasement and containment. Ie repeating the steps that led to the current war (and a couple of previous ones). You expect a different outcome next time?

I see Russia as aggressive middle power with nukes which tries to be a regional hegemon. (sorry for the Mearsheimer jargon)

You can't fight it down completely, because of nukes. You can't destroy Russia's military industry.

I would treat it as a smaller and lighter version of the Soviet Union. NATO did not interfere in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Poland back then. These countries are free now which is great.

Countries like Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan should try not to poke the bear and should not gamble that NATO will bail them out.

This is bad. Maybe it will get better with smart politics but it sure get's worse with bad politics.

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#222
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.

Is fracking better than well?

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Can you elaborate on why the Minsk agreement had to be enacted in the first place, i.e. what conflict the ceasefire was meant to cease? And how that conflict started? And who fought in that conflict? I'd really like to know.

Ukrainian civil war started by a trump style coup of a democratically elected president in Kiev who was elected largely because he was very popular in the East and South of Ukraine.

Western propaganda pretends that the East and South of Ukraine had zero agency or will to decide its own future. This is why they called the crimean referendum a sham despite trustworthy western polls validating painfully clearly that it was accurate.

The Minsk agreements gave limited independence to the Donbass. Apparently the regimes in Kiev couldn't handle that which is why they signed the agreements and then broke them.

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#224
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.

War progresses many industries and humanity as a whole. “War! What is it good for?” by Ian Morrison is a good read.

> “War! What is it good for?” by Ian Morrison is a good read.

Few people know this, but that was actually the original title for "War and Peace". It was his mistress who insisted that he call it "War and Peace".

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#225
post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on why the Minsk agreement had to be enacted in the first place, i.e. what conflict the ceasefire was meant to cease? And how that conflict started? And who fought in that conflict? I'd really like to know.

Ukrainian civil war started by a trump style coup of a democratically elected president in Kiev who was elected largely because he was very popular in the East and South of Ukraine. Western propaganda pretends that the East and South of Ukraine had zero agency or will to decide its own future. This is why they called the crimean referendum a sham despite trustworthy western polls validating painfully clearly that it…

[deleted]

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#226
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the same factors pushed the shale revolution in oil extraction The salient difference being the state intervention this time around. Fracking was largely private R&D.

The Department of Energy literally invented modern fracking; see the Eastern Gas Shales Project, which lasted for a decade and a half. Early commercial fracking worked off of shale mapping performed at Sandia National Lab; reference here https://energy.sandia.gov/wp-content/gallery/uploads/FINAL-H... (which research continues). Finally, the government provided $10 billion in tax cuts for unconventional gas drilling o…

Indeed, but $10 billion is nothing over 30 years. More than that goes into renewable research every year.

If you want a meaningful comparison it should be something like dollars per kWh.

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thats depressing. Goodbye family farms

Family farms are inherently inefficient compared to what a large corporation can achieve. The costs of the machinery necessary to work the land efficiency requires some minimum acreage to become cost effective. Under that threshold, "family farmers" need to either rent equipment seasonally, own and maintain older equipment, or lease their land to those with equipment in exchange for a cut of the harvest. It's been li…

Sorry for the late reply. I think our institutions have been so good at creating 'efficiency' that we've been able to discover the downsides.

Fragility, monopoly, monopsony. All things that are a net negative but still count as efficiency.

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#228
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

heres the deal: not intervening is not the same thing as agreeing. Not wanting to throw gasoline on the fire is not the same as thinking the fire is great, or having put it in the first place.

I like how you refer to people being able to defend from being enslaved and murdered as "throwing gasoline on the fire". If I started torturing and killing your family, would you let me do it because trying to stop is throwing gasoline on the fire? Just how inhuman can you people be?

and I would wish these things didnt happen. I ask you now. Are more people dying by us throwing weapons there? can ukraine win? so far the answer appears to be, yes, more people are dying, and no. Ukraine cannot win.

What happens when ukraine runs out of soldiers to carry the shit we send there? will YOU take their place? just how inhuman can you be, after all? and if russia wins, how many died that wouldnt have needed to. how inhuman can we be then? or is it then fine that they died?

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#229
post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I don't think so. Russia annexed the territory it really wants. If Ukraine demilitarizes they would make a deal. How can you possibly make a lasting deal with a country that wipes their arse with international agreements when it’s no longer convenient for them?. If you think a “deal” with Russia would do anything other then let it rearm itself and reinvade the rest of the country I have a bridge to sell you. After…

Maybe you are right and I am naive.

There's propaganda everywhere and it is hard to get the real picture.

I checked the Russia/Ukraine Peace negotiations of 2022 (Wikipedia). Russia seemed to be interested in striking a deal. (1)

And I agree: a deal makes no sense if you can't trust your adversary.

(1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Russia%E2%80%93Ukraine_pe...

-- Actually I'm not capable getting the official position of Russia towards negotiations. For example I can't parse this statement of Peskov:

https://tass.com/politics/1577411

Re: War and subsidies have turbocharged the green transition

#230
post #122
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vime's boots. I'm not sure about here in the EU, but the UK has a cost of living crisis such that millions[0][1][2] are regularly skipping meals. People in that situation don't have the spare money be able to install PV or upgrade their insulation. [0] https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/one-four-britons-skip-meals... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/jan/26/uk-student... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/soc…

It's unfathomable to me that people in the UK are skipping meals. If you buy rice & beans in bulk you can fill your belly for less than £1 I'm sure. Quick look on the Tesco website - bread: £0.39 £0.05/100g - chicken soup: £0.60 £0.15/100g - 1KG rice: £0.48 £0.48/kg - Baked beans: £0.50 £1.19/kg - Kidney beans: £0.59 £2.46/kg DR.WT - Tinned mackerel: £0.85 £0.97/100g DR.WT (sardines are half the price) - Eggs: £0.20…

In my experience, the average British person has no idea how to cook a square healthy meal that is also appetising enough for them to choose it over other easier options. Cooking is taught poorly (if at all) in schools and at home.

This isn't about money. We have 64% of the adult population overweight and obese, 22% at age 5, and 37% at age 10. All those numbers are growing.

The excuse often brought up is that it's "expensive to eat healthy". Absolute bollocks. It's far more expensive to eat ready-meals, order takeaway, and dine out than to buy ingredients and cook.

For snacks, a banana costs £0.15 and fills you up for longer than a £1.00 chocolate bar. But people want the chocolate bar!

I've lived in a city centre apartment block for the last few years. The frequency with which I've seen the people around me having McDonalds, burgers, pizzas, and other oily, salty, high fat, high calorie food delivered shocks me. For some people, it's upwards of 5 times a week!

If you go to a "local" or "express" supermarket, microwavable ready meals and junk food represent most of the aisles, and when you take a glance at the shopper next to you, they are buying mostly junk and inconvenience food.

If you go to a supermarket after school closing time, you'll see tens/hundreds of kids buying energy drinks (despite the age limit), multipacks of chocolates, biscuits, sweets, crisps, 1 litre bottles of pop. Evidently, they have the money for it (from their parents). University students across the country keep fast food and takeaways in business via their student loans and grants.

When people here do cook, it's:-

1) Stir fry 2) Spaghetti Bolognese 3) Pasta and sauce dish 4) Something on toast/jacket potato

Every meal that gets microwaved in my office for lunch is one of these 4 things. Basically just throwing a bunch of stuff in a wok and mixing for 10 minutes.

This is of course all anecdotal, but it's plain as day that it's about personal choice for many people, and not money. Our country has a serious problem with food and alcohol addiction, and an extreme aversion to exercise. Most people would wipe out their life savings/all of their income to eat slop as much as possible, at the detriment to their finances and health.

Every stage of British life, from infanthood, primary and high school, to university and beyond prepare the population for gorging on high energy, salty, oily junk food.

We will easily hit 75% overweight/obesity by the end of the decade.

Post reply on HN