this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2025
499 points (97.3% liked)

science

23220 readers
520 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] setnof@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago (7 children)

Guess what else would drastically reduce air pollution. Switching to electric heating aka heat pumps instead of burning wood and coal. While cooking the ventilation is already good enough but if you cannot open the damn windows because everyone is poisoning the air…

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Same goes for various industries and energy production in general. Burning stuff is usually the easiest way to do it, but it comes with some serious long term consequences. Ideally, we would use renewables to produce electricity, and then use that electricity to heat things up when needed.

Unfortunately, large parts of various industries has been built around the idea of burning things instead of using electricity. In order to fully transition, we would need to completely rebuild many factories and radically modify countless others.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

We do need to completely rebuild …

Like anything else, it could have gone smoothly if we did it in an intelligent way as opportunity presents, but turning it partisan, proceeding in fits and starts, only looking short term, refusing out of fear of change, means we keep putting it off. That’s just going to build into an emergency.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 3 days ago

On top of that, the economics only make it harder. Those who take dirty shortcuts, will have lower CAPEX and maybe even OPEX. This gives them a competitive advantage compared to those companies that choose to follow a more sustainable path.

load more comments (5 replies)