All of this can be true and at the same time it's massively harmful to use.

It remains true that the actual total costs of using hydrocarbons are not factored into their actual real world market exchange rate. And every time we've made modest steps to try to make that happen (carbon taxes, regulation) the resistance has been swift and brutal.

▲

morpheos137 12 hours ago | parent [-]

I never said HC economy is not without externality. However I do believe forcing HC substitutes before nature (depletion) forces them may be a net utility loss. The evidence is very thin a little sea level rise and a little temperature rise is worse for humanity in net than losing tecnological society.

▲

cmrdporcupine 11 hours ago | parent [-]

They're not going to deplete, every time we make an estimate on that we just find more or more ways to extract. We just keep finding more. And if we did run out of oil and gas somehow, people with this mentality will just burn coal again.

Until there is a regulatory model which forces the externalities to be accounted for, it's just a race to the bottom.

	▲	morpheos137 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		well economically recoverable oil is certainly finite in the world. it may take 30 - 50 - 100 years but if we keep burning hydrocarbons we will eventually reach a point where oil is more expensive than alternatives but that is not an argument for not using it in the meantime. The mass hysteria around anthropgenic global warming is unfounded on many levels: humans are part of nature. so is oil. earth has withstood numerous near instant on geological scale carbon spikes. it is not clear the harms of buring carbon exceed the benefits. alternatives seek political rent without showing economic competitiveness. there are certainly externalities from burning carbon but until these can be quantified and shown to exceed the benefits or shown to be better utility wise than alternatives if any exist then it should not be assumed that oil is worse. etc. as recently as 12,000 years ago the earth had massive rapid climate change. the fallacy of balance of nature. nature is never in balance. it is always changing. etc.