To be a serious we need to create a recycling and conversion industry in Canada!

There's been some serious economics research into this. And oddly, supply chain interruptions are often more deadly than the event itself.

US sanctions regimes have cut off tens of millions of people (if not hundreds) from essential medicines or treatments. Or access to sufficient food.

They see similar things in disaster zones. A very limited number of people typically die in the hurricane or the flood. Most of the deaths come afterwards when people can't get medical attention or essential food supplies are cut off.

In no way does this justify shooting people, that's also terrible.

But with the straight of Hormuz cut off. That lack of fertilizer and fuel could represent far more death outside of Iran than inside it.

Then they killed it.

General Motors EV1 - Wikipedia

(en.wikipedia.org)

We are in the predicament we are because of very specific choices by very particular people and nothing more.

The first DC locomotive was built in 1837, AC in 1896. The first electric car was built in 1834, and in 1900 38% of the cars in America were electric. No way was an electric car impossible in 1996.

The first electric car: history and origins from 1834 to today

Discover the history of the first electric car: from pioneers Anderson and Davenport in 1834 to the Jamais Contente's record in 1899. A look back at a French invention.

Electra (www.go-electra.com)

And even if it was, that's why I mentioned fuel cells, which is probably what W was talking about when he mentioned hydrogen. Batteries are better now, but in the 90s fuel cells looked like the better option. In fact, the company I mentioned is still making fuel cells today, apparently they're a good alternative to diesel for busses:

Just a moment...

(www.richmond-news.com)

We could have made way more progress than we have in the last 30 years.

Which is why I mentioned fuel cells. That's probably also why W was talking about Hydrogen. Batteries are better than fuel cells now, but in the mid 90's fuel cells looked like the better option for cars. In fact, the company I mentioned is still making fuel cells today, apparently they're great for busses:

Just a moment...

(www.richmond-news.com)

Even without fuel cells, DC electric locomotives have existed since 1837, AC since 1894. We could have made much more progress than we have in the last 30 years.

With li-ions it's much better.

Electricity generating wind turbines were invented in 1883. Vancouver has had electric trolley busses since 1948. The first concentrated solar power plant was built in 1968. Germany set up funding for installing photovoltaic roofs in 1989, Japan followed in 1994. Ballard went public in 1993, I remember reading about their fuel cells and electric cars in high school.

All the tech existed in 1996, financial necessity would have pushed innovation a lot harder than environmental foresight did.

Frick, George W Bush advocated for turning to hydrogen as an energy source in his 2003 State Of The Union address, not for the environment, but to make America less dependent on foreign energy. I'm still bitter that environmentalists didn't use that opportunity to latch on to protectionism to sell renewables to conservatives. That could have been 23 years of preparation. Not much choice now.

they are literally as we speak going to speed up drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and remove environmental obstacles including the Endangered Species Act

i just live here, man, but that's what they're reporting & it isn't like the local news isn't GOP owned...

the ESA in particular is an extremely popular law, they literally DO need the excuse of a war to get rid of it & that is what they are doing so...

@chris

If you're comparing today to the 1970s, at the time, Western dependence on oil was higher and sustainable options were either very expensive (hydro and nuclear), or experimental, low-performing and very expensive (wind and solar).

Now that there are more options for countries and their consumers than to "buy the oil at whatever price", higher oil prices won't necessarily lead to more drilling long term, as a price crash when M. E. Facilities come online is predictable 1/2

@chris

Also, bear in mind that the Trump admin will dream up their own emergencies to dismantle climate policy, even if they didn't fumble their way into more real ones. See the fake energy emergencies to force coal power plants to stay open in 2025.