yup. 2019tom’s went bankrupt? when?
Well, the first step would be a prototype. Until it's real, nobody cares. The prototype will have the problems of prototypes. The first Tesla roadsters shipped without a working transmission. Obviously, that wasn't enough to slow down Tesla.Demand side solution. You somehow get people to demand that products and services are CC friendly far beyond current levels. I'm curious how, this is your territory @Riggerjack.
Yes. Manhatten luxury real estate runs about $1700/ft2. and comes with a disease load, and security risks that many are uncomfortable with. I'm not talking about something your average MD can afford, at this stage.In this strategy those on the higher end of the economic spectrum are automagically(market) more likely/able to pay a premium for this.
Really? Who are these people you speak of? Are they the homeless folks with smartphones, or the folks in trailer parks splurging on name brand clothes from Walmart? Who do you know, who isn't here on this forum, that is uninterested in better products for virtue signaling on instagram? And why do you think they would be a problem?The inherent weakness to this is that those on the lower end just want shelter, food and the ability to better their lot. They probably will not pay a premium for CC friendly economic activities.
See those same people's comments on hobby farms or 50 cent's bling. People lust after status symbols. This is a status symbol that is very difficult to fake, and the expense is part of the appeal. (see early adopters of solar panels on suburban roofs, for how this looks in practice.)Those on the upper economic spectrum are only willing to go so far (see every comment on articles in mainstream media about @jacobs ERE).
This sounds like a visualization problem to me. If one's solution doesn't work, it's probably not going to appeal very much. One could correct for this with a better product, or by going supply side (force adoption of unappealing solutions. This thread seems full of those ideas. )The impact on climate change is limited to the demand created. This may or may not (I predict not nearly) be enough to fix the problem, by the numbers.
I wouldn't say they are mutually exclusive, but I don't know how one could really help the other. One cannot obey one's way to innovation. When Authority cannot come up with an appealing solution, I don't know how much good simply "demanding better results" is going to do, but it is clear how much good that method has done, so far.Secondary question. Are these mutually exclusive? Can we use demand side solution to begin to bring people together to demand (ha!), a global supply side solution?
When billionaires spend their own money on some Eco project, people cheer. When millionaires in Congress do the same with tax dollars, there is a different reaction. And if/when that project fails, the reaction is also different. (see ECO Domes I and II, vs Solyndra)