read.cash is a platform where you can earn money for your articles and comments. You can get paid upvotes
from other users or just earn points for writing articles and comments, which are converted daily to
Bitcoin Cash (BCH) cryptocurrency, which can be used on the Internet or converted to your local money.
I do believe there is a climate emergency that has been significantly contributed to by the use of fossil and "dirty" fuels in the production of energy. I do not understand the arguments against aiming for zero emissions. And sooner rather than later... even if it is only to make for a cleaner atmosphere and environment.
BUT... some of my questions are-
Is there a foolproof way of measuring all the implications of the impacts of energy sources?
Is "Environmental Full Cost Accounting", whilst probably more "full picture" than standard business profit/loss accounting, really able to account for full costs?
Even most clean energy production means have environmentally negative aspects which are rarely spoken of during the debates. Dealing with such things as disposal of redundant technology infrastructures over time; long term ability to sustain supply of primary and essential component raw materials; the environmental costs in the processing of the raw materials into materials essential to the technologies; and so on... Overall, in the final analysis and on balance, what are the sources of energy that have the least total negative impacts - short term; long term; and ongoing?
I even wonder if there are other unforeseen negative impacts on the environment arising from the use of clean energies?
Will wind farms impact on the weather patterns as extra energy is "sucked" out of the wind/atmosphere or unprecedented "drag" impacts the Coriolis Effect?
Is there a risk to the balance of atmospheric pressures and temperatures that is inherent in the altered albedo which may arise from the introduction of mass solar energy collection panels?
Electric Vehicles and the pending explosion in the development and use of viable battery storage systems, wind turbines, etc., will naturally result in the need for more "rare earth" metals, and who is doing the accounting on the social, environmental, economical, epidemiological, and on and on and on..., impact of this?
In fact, how much of the "big picture, full story" costs and impacts of any energy supply system ("clean" or "dirty") measured outside of a framework structured purely on financial profit and economic rationalism?