Imagine how cheap it could've been if we started 50 years ago.
this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2024
47 points (96.1% liked)
Europe
8484 readers
2 users here now
News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐ช๐บ
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐ฉ๐ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
Rules
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
- Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
- No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
- No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.
Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
That's 1/4 of the total tax revenue of EU member states.
If that's what it takes, it's already too late.
That almost certainly is including private investment, which makes it a lot more possible. Especially with a lot of it replacing old fossil fuel infrastructure.
It doesn't ewven need to when (by the article linked) those investments are one side of a plan that also includes saving 2.8 trillion in fossil fuel exports in the same time, while also projecting +2.4 trillion in damages if no climate action is taken.
And that's not even a new thing. We know that taking climate action now will actually save us money, short and long term. But it will also decrease the money paid by lobbyists to politicians and media and the profits of fossil fuel companies, so we will get headlines like these and a lot of political narratives to discourage us.
tn = trillion (10^12^), so โฌ 1 500 000 000 000