Climate Change/Mass Extinction Megathread

[Josquius]

I know BP is already making quite big efforts to pivot towards renewables. I'd be surprised if Shell wasn't too. Though that's a tough demand.

[Barrister]

Yes?

I feel like we've had this debate before.  You can't tackle climate change by just going after pipelines and oil companies.  The demand for petroleum will still exist.  You have to go after the demand for petroleum - switch to alternate forms of heating, electricity, transportation, etc.

[Maladict]

Yes?

I feel like we've had this debate before.  You can't tackle climate change by just going after pipelines and oil companies.  The demand for petroleum will still exist.  You have to go after the demand for petroleum - switch to alternate forms of heating, electricity, transportation, etc.

Hence the second part of the ruling. Although that can't be enforced as much.

[Barrister]

Yes?

I feel like we've had this debate before.  You can't tackle climate change by just going after pipelines and oil companies.  The demand for petroleum will still exist.  You have to go after the demand for petroleum - switch to alternate forms of heating, electricity, transportation, etc.

Hence the second part of the ruling. Although that can't be enforced as much.

[Maladict]

Dutch court orders Shell to reduce their CO2 ouput by 45% before 2030. They also have to make substantial effort towards 45% reduction of CO2 emitted through the use of their products.
Shell will appeal but the high court upheld the earlier, similar verdict against the Dutch government. This might set an interesting precedent.

How the hell is that supposed to work?  At it's heart it's an oil company.  It's just supposed to sell less oil?

They actually set that target themselves, only by 2035. They're being ordered to do it faster.

[crazy canuck]

Seattle to Vancouver doesn't make a lot of sense given the low speed, but island hops certainly do. Very cool

Spoken like a person who has never experienced the traffic North of Seattle.   


or South of Vancouver for that matter.

[Valmy]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

[Sheilbh]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

If I had my way it probably wouldn't be cheap because I would insist on full Art Deco interiors, an open bar and the possibility of a murder to investigate on every trip

[crazy canuck]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

Why would it have to be cheap.  I would be willing to pay a non cheap price to get to Seattle faster than driving.  Going city centre to city centre and not having to go through airports has its perks.

[Valmy]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

Why would it have to be cheap.  I would be willing to pay a non cheap price to get to Seattle faster than driving.  Going city centre to city centre and not having to go through airports has its perks.

Because time is money. Paying more to go there slower doesn't make much sense, so maybe if it was pleasant with art deco and blackjack tables people might use it anyway.

On the other hand if it is cheaper than flying, and potentially driving, then it might be worth spending a few extra hours in the air.

[Jacob]

I feel like we've had this debate before.  You can't tackle climate change by just going after pipelines and oil companies.  The demand for petroleum will still exist.  You have to go after the demand for petroleum - switch to alternate forms of heating, electricity, transportation, etc.

I guess this is the stick part of the carrot and stick approach.

[Jacob]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

If it happens, I'll do it at least once. Whether I'll do it more than once depends on the actual execution - comfort, convenience, price.

[Tonitrus]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

Why would it have to be cheap.  I would be willing to pay a non cheap price to get to Seattle faster than driving.  Going city centre to city centre and not having to go through airports has its perks.

Except it still goes through the air (thus over people and property), so would undoubtedly hit a massive barrier of red-tape, bureaucracy, and security limitations, no matter where they take off from.

Agitators that like to bring explosives onto enclosed aerial vehicles ruin things for everybody. 

[Sheilbh]

Except it still goes through the air (thus over people and property), so would undoubtedly hit a massive barrier of red-tape, bureaucracy, and security limitations, no matter where they take off from.

Agitators that like to bring explosives onto enclosed aerial vehicles ruin things for everybody. 

Sure - but practicalities aside, it could have a dock on top of the Space Needle!

[crazy canuck]

I don't know. That would only make sense if it is cheap.

But it might be cheap, I don't know.

It might also be more pleasant than a plane if you can move around and look at the views and do things during your trip.

Why would it have to be cheap.  I would be willing to pay a non cheap price to get to Seattle faster than driving.  Going city centre to city centre and not having to go through airports has its perks.

Because time is money. Paying more to go there slower doesn't make much sense, so maybe if it was pleasant with art deco and blackjack tables people might use it anyway.

On the other hand if it is cheaper than flying, and potentially driving, then it might be worth spending a few extra hours in the air.

The part you are missing is the Vancouver-Seattle trip would be faster than driving and about the same time as flying once you factor in the fact you dont have to make the drive to and from the airport.

So on your theory that time is money (which isnt really true but that is another topic) they could charge a premium.

edit: another time you probably should have read the link before expressing a view on what is proposed in the link