• luciferofastora@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    What money would they bribe with? An industry founded on the idea of long-term sustainability over short-term profits just isn’t gonna have the same kind of money to swing around.

    • NihilsineNefas@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Exactly my point (scuse the lack of obvious sarcasm/rhetorical question)

      Unfortunate lack of money in the “lets make the world a less shitty place” department

      • luciferofastora@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        I got your point well enough, I just like to follow up on such rhetorical questions with answers to point out what should be obvious (but in my experience isn’t to everyone).

        If a rhetorical question is a device to for monologues, that response is the equivalent in dialogues to double down on the point. I believe there’s a technical term for that type of exchange too, but I can’t recall it right now.

    • possumparty@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Having worked on numerous large scale wind projects and seeing some of the financials, there’s definitely plenty of money to be swung around. Turbines typically pay for themselves within 2-3 years, the next 17-18 years of their lifespan have some maintenance costs, but it’s largely just profit. Owners are fiercely protective of any lost production factor, down to arguing over who’s responsible for a fractions of a percent of that lost production.

      • luciferofastora@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 days ago

        Thanks for that insight! I’m not sure there’s enough money to swing back at the oil lobby, but it’s definitely good to know that profitability isn’t a blocker in that field.