The Left wants you to go without power to save the world; meanwhile they're silent about China's new coal plants

 David Mcdermott Hughes is saying that we should go without electricity, just like people in Zimbabwe do, in order to fight climate change.

What's odd is that David doesn't seem to mind that China, that already produces more CO2 per year than the US and the EU combined, is drastically increasing its CO2 production by building coal fired power plants.

But he says this about what we should do:

For a while, let’s eat a cold dinner here and there. Continuity[ having electricity 24 hours a day] costs too much. Climate change kills, and it kills vulnerable people first. Intermittency saves lives, and it saves vulnerable people first. Let the pause take its place in continuous climate activism.

So we're supposed to live like we're a third world country to save lives lost due to climate change but China is fine drastically increasing its CO2 production so that Chinese people have electricity 24 hours a day.

Of course there's no real evidence that people are causing any sort of existentially threatening or even serious bothersome climate change. Temperatures are increasing but slowly and on par with what we'd expect since we're coming out of a little ice age.

The seas kept rising despite Obama's claim that he'd stop that but then they've been rising since we started measuring them back in the 19th century long before mankind produced enough CO2 to make a difference. But once again as we exit a little ice age we expect the seas to rise.

David admits that people who are forced to live without 24/7 electricity don't like it and don't want to suffer through it but to him their suffering is a small price to pay for his feeling good about himself.

Zimbabwe and Puerto Rico thus provide models for what we might call pause-full electricity. Admittedly, neither Zimbabweans nor Puerto Ricans chose to accept this rationing. And in Zimbabwe, official incompetence has reduced electricity to a nearly unbearable degree. Still, Zimbabwe’s past and Puerto Rico’s potential indicate just and feasible ways of living amid intermittency.

What's interesting is that David doesn't even try to compare the negative impacts of climate change to the negative impacts of not having 24/7 electricity. For example the number of people who die from heat waves has gone way down since air conditioning has become more available.  But if we restrict the grid to solar and wind we know that we'll have to have power outages on hot days thereby effectively eliminating air conditioning.  David doesn't seem to consider that the people that would die because of that are a cost.

Of course we know that to make the US all "green" energy would require 3,474 years of the entire worlds cobalt production.  But David hasn't bothered to think about that.

The reality is that David and leftists like him who want Americans to live in the same sort of hell hole that people in Venezuela live in don't really think about the problem; they just let their emotions guide them.

Sadly that will result in lots of deaths.

This is what the Green New Deal is about; making politicians rich and making your life worse in order to make leftists feel good about themselves.