this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2025
662 points (99.1% liked)

World News

50581 readers
1336 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HugeNerd@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

Yes, and without the discovery of cubic miles of oil, we wouldn't have had the energy and power to get to the point we are now.

You are looking only at electrical energy, and we certainly DO NOT have the capacity to keep our little planetary civilization going without fossil fuels.

Think of it like this: Even if you could travel back in time to 1850 with the knowledge of GaNFETs, 30%+ efficient solar panels, and lithium batteries, how would you be able to do anything about it?

How would you mine the enormous amounts of copper and other materials needed with the infrastructure of 1850: wooden carts, horses, and a few steam shovels as advanced and precious as a modern-day aircraft carrier?

How would you feed the people that are now no longer working in the agricultural domain without inputs of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides?

The reason is that knowledge without energy is an abstract idea.

So, yes, short term, all the rich parts of world will be able to pat themselves on the back about solar energy, but as your everyday household appliances degrade, where and how will you get the materials and resources to say, make a new washing machine?

Please don't tell me you think we got to 8 billion people because of vaccines? Or that we shouldn't worry and just keep adding endless mouths on this planet?

[–] Allero@lemmy.today 1 points 3 days ago

The thing is, there's no need to rebuild the world from the 1850s.

We already have the required machinery and energy. We can make use of what we have, even fossil-powered, to speed up the green transition. Our only goal is to keep it going at a growing pace.

As per agriculture, there are sustainable solutions that I addressed in my other response to you. There are green fertilizers, and there are also genetically modified plants able to produce their own pesticides. There are also innovations in logistics and food sharing initiatives to make less food rot without use.

We have the knowledge, we have the energy. What we lack is the political will to shut down those standing in the way for their own gain over our collective future.