The 2008 economic crisis changed the US's relationship with energy
It wasn't obvious at the time, but the US uncoupled carbon emissions and GDP growth.
It wasn't obvious at the time, but the US uncoupled carbon emissions and GDP growth.
The short version
- It wasn’t obvious at the time, but the US uncoupled carbon emissions and GDP growth.
- One argument that often comes up about climate change is that fossil fuels are good because they powered economic growth that has left most people better off overall.
- And, to an extent, that has been true, but it’s also an extremely limited perspective.
What happened
It’s pretty obvious now that the growth they powered has come with very high costs that we’ve only recently started to pay, in the form of damages and disruptions from extreme weather events. With things like sea level rise expected to continue for centuries even if we hit net zero, it’s difficult to estimate how expensive that growth will eventually be.
Why it matters
But that perspective is also limited: We now have better ways to power our growth—ways that are less environmentally damaging now and won’t leave our descendants with a carbon debt that will be difficult to manage.
Summary by Nerd News Network. Read the full article at Ars Technica via the links above and below.