Concrete and steel are two of the least-green building materials available, and nuclear plants take a ■■■■■■■■ of both to construct. Probably the greenest electrical power comes from hydro via an earth-embankment dam.
Issue ultimately boils down to the fact that environutd want their cake and to eat it too. On one hand they want the world and standard of living that fossil fuel use created (it liberated a greater portion of the world out of poverty than almost any other thing humanity has ever did in its collective history) but on the other hand want to completely eliminate its use but then play stupid when you point out to them that the modern world is only possible because of it.
Ironic isn’t it. If it were not for fossil fuel and CO2 spewing machinery, the planet would probably still only have a few hundred thousand (certainly fewer than a billion) human inhabitants. Maybe that is where the environutds, as you call them, want us to be. With them being among them, of course.
Erase most if not all of that population growth after 1750. That was the onset of the modern era of energy production that resulted in so many life-extending and standard of living improving things that we take completely for granted today.
Technological advancement, research and development by people MUCH smarter than you and me that saw a problem and came up with ways to maybe not solve the problem but made it less of a problem.
Oh wait…you were inferring governmental interference.
And I agree, I’m sure technological advancements have helped immensely. But I’m wondering if it was industry who proactively identified that “problem” and took steps, proactively, to fix the “problem”.