Discussion of climate, how it is changing, activism around that, the politics, and the energy systems change we need in order to stabilize things.
As a starting point, the burning of fossil fuels, and to a lesser extent deforestation and release of methane are responsible for the warming in recent decades:
How much each change to the atmosphere has warmed the world:
Recommended actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the near future:
Anti-science, inactivism, and unsupported conspiracy theories are not ok here.
They put a gas lobbyist in charge of the economy and energy. And she now wants to do the whole "Tankrabatt" thing again, which turned out to be a gift for the oil firms the first time around.
That's symbolic for what conservative voters do: Doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome. Just insanely stupid.
What are you talking about? It was a resounding success and it will work exactly as well this time around.
The fossil fuel industry will get sooo much money.
I get the joke, that's why I was referring to the voters as the insane idiots, not the politicians. The politicians are just corrupt liars.
What are you talking about? It was a resounding success and it will work exactly as well this time around.
Hard as it is to believe, conservative voters have an ideology. They want more hierarchy, more exploitation, more oppression, and more cruelty because for them that is stability and justice and order and a winner's due.
People's prosperity is not the point, their own prosperity is not the point, the cruelty is the point. That is why conservative women get abortions and vote to end abortion, that's why conservative people of color vote to let the schools their kids go to be defunded. They would rather get punished and suffer than live in a world where prosperity comes freely.
Sometimes they argue that necessity is the mother of invention, sometimes they argue for a religious necessity for hierarchy, sometimes they talk about it being a cruel world and needing to be ready through practice and preparation, sometimes they find the thought of violence glorious, sometimes they want to subsume their identity into an organization that is powerful.
Whatever the case, the cruelty is the point.
But doing the obviously right thing and build up renewable energies as fast as possible, could be seen as confirmation, that the greens were right. An the path now my led to unrest or fascism, but at least you will never have to admit the greens might be right about renewables and climate change.
subisdizing fossil fuels during shortage is opposite of reasonable policy. While only path to prevent global warming is carbon tax and dividend, giving people more money during shortages is better policy than subsidies. If it is calculated that average person will face $100 in extra costs due to fuel prices, giving $50 in payroll tax cuts, and $50 cash to everyone is path to compensating both employees forced to get to work, and all people. Whether EVs or bicycles or transit or just paying more for gas for their cars, people are empowered towards solutions that maximize their welfare.
For Germany to triple down on geopolitical extortion energy is a special kind of stupid.
Especially because the tax cuts will be pocketed by petrol corporations at least in part instead of making gas guzzling cheaper. Who doesn't want to increase big petrol profits at the expense of the community (because eventually the people need to pay for the tax cuts one way or another...).
Short-term your proposal makes sense - and a lot more than what seems to be done in Germany.
Long-term the only available and viable solution is making electric vehicles more attractive (by subsidizing them, the electricity to operate them and/or punishing the purchase of ICE cars).
When looking at new cars it's easy to make a case for EV.
When buying used it's a different thing, especially if the car is more than a few years old.
A few year old combustion engine cars are lot cheaper than comparable electric ones.
And a lot of years old EVs often have batteries with serious degradation, because battery (thermal) management was way less advanced when they were produced.
We are in trying times, but the prospect is getting better and better for EVs.
Long-term the only available and viable solution is making electric vehicles more attractive (by subsidizing them, the electricity to operate them and/or punishing the purchase of ICE cars).
Carbon tax and dividend is best/only policy not subject to political BS. $300/ton is right tax level (75c/liter gasoline). In US, that would be enough to pay each citizen/resident $4000/year with unchanged behaviour. EVs are better TCO even at $1/liter gasoline. Government/polticians doesn't need to be involved in marketing "science benefits", and carbon tax and dividend costs 0. Let private sector convince people how to save money with a better type of car, or let people use transit/cycling or live closer to where they need to go to. You effectively do punish behaviour that needlessly wastes fuel.
EV subsidies incentivizes car purchases not car use. If a used gas guzzler is cheap because it is uneconomical for most people, someone who needs it for 10 miles/week of school drop off and groceries gets a cheap car that pays for minimal climate destruction it contributes to. West has tried EV incentives before. Political BS of giving incumbents $$$Bs, while establishment funds disinformation to protest against the subsidies and disruption of establishment. Human sustainability gets massive disinformation budget to condemn it.
Tbf it's just a tax cut, not a subsidy. Excise is per liter and VAT is percentage of total price so purely through VAT I imagine they're still taxing a liter of fuel more than they used to, in relation to volume not price that is.
It's not great, but they still can't make fuel too cheap this way. It's still pretty unaffordable.
Using more coal is the only tool you can use in a 4 week timeline but it's not great long term.