• VelvetGentleman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Not everything is binary. We don’t need 100% renewables and 0% gas and 0% plastic and 0% ICE vehicles.

    As a species, we need to get to zero emissions, and ideally negative numbers. It’s easy to point fingers at others and then do nothing, but there’s too much of that going on right now. Any reduction is a good thing.

    • TechNerdWizard42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      You can’t have 0 emmisions. Even a barren asteroid emits.

      You can have net 0. And net 0 can include petrochemicals.

      • VelvetGentleman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        And net 0 can include petrochemicals.

        Maybe at some point in the future when carbon capture is a viable technology. But we’re already at the point where “we’ll deal with it later” is not a good enough solution.

      • DarthFrodo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I agree that there’s no way around petrochemicals, and we’ll have to offset the emissions to reach net 0.

        Gas heating has an alternative though. Heat pumps are already cheaper to run compared to gas heating, even without any carbon offsetting.

        The pressure to reach net 0 is only gonna grow as the impacts of climate change get worse. To reach net 0 we’ll have to offset all significant emissions. When the offsets are priced in, using gas heaters becomes insanely expensive in comparison to heat pumps.

        It’s just a matter of time until gas heating is essentially dead. It might be in 10 years or 20 years, but there’s no way around it.