Nah, you don't address a problem using a strategy that is confirmed as a failure.
Remove the cumbersome regulations and allow competition to occur.
In general competition can only survive with the help of regulations - otherwise we just get one all-powerful winner, and a bunch of slaves.
Nah, you don't address a problem using a strategy that is confirmed as a failure.
> Remove the cumbersome regulations and allow competition to occur.
In general competition can only survive with the help of regulations - otherwise we just get one all-powerful winner, and a bunch of slaves.
It's not ignoring the problem, it's addressing it. The technology may have been available but it has been too costly and too unreliable (hydro fails in droughts, solar isn't as effective in areas that have significant amounts of overcast days, and wind turbines only last about 30 years). Humans will always take the cheapest and easiest way available.
Looking at the reasons why something failed is a good way to find a way to fix it. Finding ways to reduce alternative power source costs shouldn't be confined to only a few corporations or the government. Remove the cumbersome regulations and allow competition to occur. Governments stifle competition for big corporations by writing regulations that benefit the biggest donors.
Btw, I'm still a firm believer that the Earth will fix itself, but humans may not be able to adapt to or be willing to accept the changes that occur. Also I think that this is a cycle that naturally occurs and am not as worried about it because Nature works in a longer time frame than we can accurately pinpoint.