>>2046885You still haven't explained what metric you are using to work out expense. It's not as simple as saying 'oil costs X per barrel' and 'a windmill costs Y'. Using a short term mindset has, to some extent, led to the situation we find ourselves in. You can use alternatives to things like GDP that factor in lost ecosystem services, soil degradation, ect. These very quickly change a conutry's account book and would force a country to realise that the ways in which we have been measuring wealth and expense are far, far too narrow.
>our entire economy and lifestyle are built on fossil fuelsBut that is already changing rapidly. And whats more is it's the developing nations (south america) and china that are making huge strides towards moving away from burning fossil fuels to power their economies.
> We're looking at drastic changes if we want to reduce our fossil fuel consumption.I think you over state the size of the change required to make some important steps. In my opinion the biggest challenges lie in agriculture and how wealthy nations consume. However, there is great work being done on the ecological intensification of agriculture, and things like the EU's 'right to repair' is a good start to addressing some of the negative aspects of consumer capitalism.
>Meanwhile global warming is barely an economic problem at this point.This issue isn't just rising global temps. It's soil degredation, biodiveristy collapse, the increased wildland-urban-interface (and the associated risks involved with man being exposed more to wildlife).
That's before you even start to consider the things we've already potentially lost. Do you know how many important medical discoveries have been made in wild places? Who knows how many more have been wasted.
>Fearmongering worksI wouldn't call it fearmongering. I'd call it presenting the facts.
