As we manufacture renewable technologies, are we costing the planet? Yet how best can we decelerate our overconsumption? Some binaries examined
Despite the clumsiness and backwardness of the current owner, we still take value from X/Twitter’s capacity to dramatise and thematise important issues, especially around the climate crisis. Take these - the first is response to a tweet by environmental writer Rebecca Solnit.
Click onto either of the posts and follow the argumentation - between degrowthers who see climate solutions in the reduction of production/consumption, and pragmatists who see renewable tech as carbon-costly, but worth building long term.
From this tweet by Aasis Joshi, a startling graphic - and his text:”In just six years (2016-2021), we've consumed over 75% of what we did over the 20th century. To address our environmental impacts we need cultural & political innovation much more than technological innovation.” (Source for data in graphic here).
And finally, here’s a very useful article from Yale Climate Connections, providing “resources for debunking common solar and wind myths”. One debunk, relevant to the preceding:
Q: How destructive is mining for solar panel components?
A: Significantly less destructive than mining for fossil fuels.
“Mining quantities for low-carbon energy is hundreds to thousands of times lower than mining for fossil fuels.” Hanna Ritchie, Sustainability by Numbers. And a follow-up piece from the same source: “The low-carbon energy transition will need less mining than fossil fuels, even when adjusted for waste rock.” (Similar comparisons apply to concerns about human conditions connected to both kinds of mining.)