Good point. But when it comes to this part of the bill that Manchin is trying to get rid of is it really that essential, relatively speaking, considering that market forces are already driving coal out?
Good point. But when it comes to this part of the bill that Manchin is trying to get rid of is it really that essential, relatively speaking, considering that market forces are already driving coal out?
I don't know. But if we polled the top ten climate scientists in the world would they have a definitive answer? Especially about the specific negative affects that will happen? Decarbonizing is important, but at what cost?
Good point. But when it comes to this part of the bill that Manchin is trying to get rid of is it really that essential, relatively speaking, considering that market forces are already driving coal out?
Because time is so short (50% by 2030 are numbers I hear frequently) to drive down carbon emissions, no.
I don't know. But if we polled the top ten climate scientists in the world would they have a definitive answer? Especially about the specific negative affects that will happen? Decarbonizing is important, but at what cost?