> I don’t think there’s such a thing as any truly clean energy.
Your use of "clean" here seems like a strawman.
Some forms of energy exploited by humans (i.e. fossil fuels) impose far greater environmental costs than others (i.e. wind/solar). Lumping them all together because nothing manufactured at scale is "clean" is ignoring the vast differences between them.
That's why anymore, the terms "renewable" and "zero-carbon" are used to describe future energy sources, not "clean".
> And for what in the end? To support a fringe economic system of monetary transfer and speculation?
Those are the ones said out loud.
The unspoken end is to weaken and destroy the liberal institutions that are currently backed by the power of fiat currency, to then replace them with illiberal ones.
Climate change and the environment are not typically concerns for people who want that.
Your use of "clean" here seems like a strawman.
Some forms of energy exploited by humans (i.e. fossil fuels) impose far greater environmental costs than others (i.e. wind/solar). Lumping them all together because nothing manufactured at scale is "clean" is ignoring the vast differences between them.
That's why anymore, the terms "renewable" and "zero-carbon" are used to describe future energy sources, not "clean".
> And for what in the end? To support a fringe economic system of monetary transfer and speculation?
Those are the ones said out loud.
The unspoken end is to weaken and destroy the liberal institutions that are currently backed by the power of fiat currency, to then replace them with illiberal ones.
Climate change and the environment are not typically concerns for people who want that.