I also agree with you. I think it is one of the factors at play here. But your argument is a big one, too. We outsourced a lot of production and thus knowhow which they have adopted and improved upon. The possibility of a tech wise dependence on one nation gives a lot of power to those, which is also why certain technology sectors should be brought back.
So you say that is the reason for this decision?
Thank you for answering my question.
That’s not what is critizised here, is it?
I might misunderstand but I thought the cheap production of necessary components for green energy coming from China, only possible by shortcuts of reducing worker rights or otherwise exploitation of ressources, should be countered.
Last I have read it was using the car for 2 hours a day for work. But thinking about people buying groceries and doing entertainment related stuff must also contribute some minutes, so I was leniently adding an hour.
Oh no. What a waste of power and space. For leaving it roughly 21 hours on average in one spot.
A court room with stale air and only him with his mask on. Surely, what could go wrong? I see no risks at all.
Just let him join remotely. What is the big deal here?
I seem to have issues trying to convey my intention when I am highlighting why these industries use the term climate change now. I try it once more.
‘Climate is changing. It is something that has always happened. It’s natural. Climate change is completely normal.’ That is the implied meaning, especially by fossil fuel industries, which more than often try to shift the blame away from them by either making it a personal issue (carbon footprint) or describing it as a natural occurance. Intentionally ignoring their influence by burning resources and releasing damaging gases, raising temperatures, melting ice, damaging the saline conveyor belt.
I agree. Global warming is one aspect of many of our current climate crisis. And it will become worse when politics won’t restrict the reign of fossil fuel industries.
Calling it climate change implies it is of natural change. It belittles the criticality of the human induced influence. The fossil fuel industry knows exactly why they are calling it climate change and not climate crisis. Global warming is also, as much as climate change, scientifically correct, but let’s be honest. Since when does the industry care about scientifical facts? They use that in ill faith.
It’s not simply a climate change. It’s a coined term by the fossil fuel industry. Like BP introduced the individual carbon footprint, this one should also be ignored. It’s a climate crisis.
Thank you for this article, really insightful. That’s good news.