Tesla Powerwall Jan 10, 2020 9:21:22 GMT 11
Post by EVangelist on Jan 10, 2020 9:21:22 GMT 11
Things need to make “economic sense” because no-one has an infinite amount of money. A Tesla PW2 costs $12.5k installed. That is not a trivial sum, and a household needs to weigh that against everything else it spends money on.
If there are solutions “A”, “B” and “C” to tacking some aspect of climate change, we need to be able to work out which of those options is economically the best one, that it is the most effective for the amount of money spent. Otherwise we would potentially waste some of the finite amount of money we have on a “solution” which may not deliver the outcome we need, and then not have the money we need to implement the solution that would work better. How would that help the situation?
Acting on climate change makes lots of economic sense, and that conclusion would have been made decades ago if the costs of externalities and the increasing mitigation costs the longer the delay before acting had have been properly accounted for. So the argument is not with economics, but the fact that the economic analysis has been woefully inadequate to date (and often still is) and conveniently excludes many relevant costs.
That’s when governments need to step in and say although the modelling is incomplete, it is much more likely that acting will cost a lot less than not acting. Unfortunately, we don’t have one of those governments.