15 ms·

The United States military could best be used to fight this by destroying (with warning) global fossil fuel infrastructure that wasn't voluntarily closed, bit b

The United States military could best be used to fight this by destroying (with warning) global fossil fuel infrastructure that wasn't voluntarily closed, bit by bit with a decade long schedule. The announcement alone would prompt a massive shift in energy production, use, investment etc. Our own legacy infrastructure would also have to be on the list. Call it a Paris accord with teeth. It will never happen, because collectively we don't believe the cost of climate change is greater than the cost of leveling the landscape of incentives to reduce emissions + reducing emissions. The US could unilaterally leverage its remaining military lead to enact global change.

tlrobinson 6y ago
That sounds like a good way to start World War III. The top oil producing countries after the US are: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Canada, China, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, Brazil, Iran, Kuwait https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6
- Mountain_Skies 6y ago
  Nuclear winter would solve global warming though it still would count as climate change, so maybe it's a wash.
- mirimir 6y ago
  Well, Russia doesn't seem so happy about global warming. I gather that melting permafrost screws up gas production. So maybe they'd want to work with the US.
- jchook 6y ago
  The US is well versed in "the lesser of two evils"
- jfrankamp 6y ago
  All signatories of the Paris accord. All are nominally thought to be rapidly transforming their economies in response to an existential crisis. "including high polluters such as China, the US, India, Russia, Japan, Germany, South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Indonesia and Mexico, which generate more than half the world's greenhouse gas emissions, will somehow drive down their carbon pollution voluntarily and assiduously without any binding enforcement mechanism" What is the binding enforcement mechanism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement
mnl 6y ago
Wow... So the military of the state that has contributed most to the global cumulative CO2 emissions (25%) can "solve" the problem with indiscriminate attacks and war crimes everywhere else now. Fascinating. Are people forgetting about this practice of thinking about their idea at least for 30 seconds before starting to type?
- jfrankamp 6y ago
  Targeting unoccupied fossil fuel infrastructure on an announced schedule is indiscriminate? War crimes for killing an oil derrick? That is fascinating to me. We know the Paris accord cannot work without enforcement. It is economically disadvantageous to go first. As I said, it will never happen. We don't take the threat seriously, we don't believe it is an existential threat.
  - mnl 6y ago
    Well, it happens to be both things. I have no doubt that you will find international criminal law fascinating, you just have to google it.
kaikai 6y ago
The US military is a leading source of carbon emissions
malandrew 6y ago
Can militaries around the world even operate without fossil fuels? Some of the larger ships and submarines are nuclear, but pretty much everything else is fossil fuel dependent AFAIK.

tlrobinson 6y ago

That sounds like a good way to start World War III. The top oil producing countries after the US are: Saudi Arabia, Russia, Canada, China, Iraq, United Arab Emirates, Brazil, Iran, Kuwait https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=709&t=6

Mountain_Skies 6y ago
Nuclear winter would solve global warming though it still would count as climate change, so maybe it's a wash.
mirimir 6y ago
Well, Russia doesn't seem so happy about global warming. I gather that melting permafrost screws up gas production. So maybe they'd want to work with the US.
jchook 6y ago
The US is well versed in "the lesser of two evils"
jfrankamp 6y ago
All signatories of the Paris accord. All are nominally thought to be rapidly transforming their economies in response to an existential crisis. "including high polluters such as China, the US, India, Russia, Japan, Germany, South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Indonesia and Mexico, which generate more than half the world's greenhouse gas emissions, will somehow drive down their carbon pollution voluntarily and assiduously without any binding enforcement mechanism" What is the binding enforcement mechanism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Agreement

mnl 6y ago

Wow... So the military of the state that has contributed most to the global cumulative CO2 emissions (25%) can "solve" the problem with indiscriminate attacks and war crimes everywhere else now. Fascinating. Are people forgetting about this practice of thinking about their idea at least for 30 seconds before starting to type?

jfrankamp 6y ago
Targeting unoccupied fossil fuel infrastructure on an announced schedule is indiscriminate? War crimes for killing an oil derrick? That is fascinating to me. We know the Paris accord cannot work without enforcement. It is economically disadvantageous to go first. As I said, it will never happen. We don't take the threat seriously, we don't believe it is an existential threat.
- mnl 6y ago
  Well, it happens to be both things. I have no doubt that you will find international criminal law fascinating, you just have to google it.

kaikai 6y ago

The US military is a leading source of carbon emissions

malandrew 6y ago

Can militaries around the world even operate without fossil fuels? Some of the larger ships and submarines are nuclear, but pretty much everything else is fossil fuel dependent AFAIK.