> The perfect is the enemy of the good.
The bad is also the enemy of the good.
Nuclear would be an example of a good solution that isn't perfect. Natural gas is an example of bad solution, in that it doesn't actually fit the definition of a solution because it doesn't in any way contribute to solving the problem.
> Natural gas is roughly half as bad as coal, and it's an easy win, compared to the alternatives.
This is simply false. Given methane emissions, we don't actually know that it's better at all, let alone half as bad.
> If we sit around waiting for reduction of energy use and increase in renewables to save us, we are screwed.
Actually, we're pretty much screwed no matter what we do, which is why the marginal-improvement-that-might-not-even-be-an-improvement you're trying to say is acceptable, isn't acceptable.
> Gotta take what we can get for now, and continue fighting for even better solutions.
Is "fighting for even better solutions" what you think you're doing here?
The bad is also the enemy of the good.
Nuclear would be an example of a good solution that isn't perfect. Natural gas is an example of bad solution, in that it doesn't actually fit the definition of a solution because it doesn't in any way contribute to solving the problem.
> Natural gas is roughly half as bad as coal, and it's an easy win, compared to the alternatives.
This is simply false. Given methane emissions, we don't actually know that it's better at all, let alone half as bad.
> If we sit around waiting for reduction of energy use and increase in renewables to save us, we are screwed.
Actually, we're pretty much screwed no matter what we do, which is why the marginal-improvement-that-might-not-even-be-an-improvement you're trying to say is acceptable, isn't acceptable.
> Gotta take what we can get for now, and continue fighting for even better solutions.
Is "fighting for even better solutions" what you think you're doing here?