While you aren’t entirely wrong we could also do actual realistic things to disincentivize fossil fuel extraction like remove government subsidies from it. Pass laws that not only require O&G companies to remediate the land (which we have but don’t really enforce), but require that they put money into a fund proportional to the expected cost of remediation vs. the lifespan of the field. Or have the companies build the single-use transportation system to their ports of choice. Why do I, who would really like there to be a world for my kids in 50 years, have to pay for those things, or let companies absolutely devastate the land with no repercussions whatsoever?
And yes, before you say it, I’d like the remediation plans to apply to just about all resource extraction methods, not just the fossil fuels. Although if we just internalized the cost of releasing all that carbon into the atmosphere, O&G would die out in a couple years.
While you aren’t entirely wrong we could also do actual realistic things to disincentivize fossil fuel extraction like remove government subsidies from it. Pass laws that not only require O&G companies to remediate the land (which we have but don’t really enforce), but require that they put money into a fund proportional to the expected cost of remediation vs. the lifespan of the field. Or have the companies build the single-use transportation system to their ports of choice. Why do I, who would really like there to be a world for my kids in 50 years, have to pay for those things, or let companies absolutely devastate the land with no repercussions whatsoever?
And yes, before you say it, I’d like the remediation plans to apply to just about all resource extraction methods, not just the fossil fuels. Although if we just internalized the cost of releasing all that carbon into the atmosphere, O&G would die out in a couple years.
Fully agree across the board. (Except the partially wrong bit, heh.)