The only direct thing we (the Netherlands) can do to prevent carastrophic climate change is to leave fossil fuels on our territory in the ground. Everything else is indirect.

▲

Sabinus 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

No, the only direct thing the Netherlands can do is decarbonise the economy.

Shifting sources of carbon to outside the country is just passing the buck.

	▲	Scarblac 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Decarbonising is indirect. Once it gets out of the ground, it will be turned into CO2 by someone, somewhere.

▲

kyboren 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I know this is an unfathomable concept, but to actually "leave fossil fuels [...] in the ground" you have to stop using fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels someone else refused to leave in the ground means--surprisingly--that fossil fuels weren't left in the ground after all.

And it turns out that we actually live on a shared planet with a common atmosphere; sourcing your fuels from abroad does nothing to prevent climate change. But it does mean that you are unable to secure some of the most fundamental inputs to your economy.

	▲	slashdev 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Plus you have no control over the standards for extractions (e.g. methane leaks), and shipping it causes more pollution. They're actually worse off, and they pay more for it instead of creating jobs and keeping the money in their own economy. Meaning less money for e.g. green programs to move away from fossil fuels. It's just a losing proposition in every way.
	▲	Scarblac 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> I know this is an unfathomable concept, but to actually "leave fossil fuels [...] in the ground" you have to stop using fossil fuels. Obviously not, as we're closing these fields and haven't stopped yet. Someone will have to stop using it, yes.