The critical elements you've left out are velocity and magnitude of change. Historically these changes occur over thousands of years, this one has occurred in less than 150 years, which coincides with the advent of cheap energy (fossil) consumption, significant social wealth increase, significant material consumption capacity, which requires magnitudes more energy consumption.
Obviously an unsustainable position for practical purposes (resource limit) but also pollution purposes. If it was solid do continue to pollute, China would not have implemented their clean up initiatives nor pivot to Nuclear - although the latter is more to do with energy security.
The last government fcked around for 10 years so the country lost time designing and implementing a coherent energy policy that retained base load, whilst complementing with new energy sources (cleaner, self sufficient objectives). The new government is only slightly better (they have retained some base load to the disappointment of their looney fringe), whilst their policy is more short term politically driven, than long term socially and economically driven.
For the record, I'm not a left loonie. I am a socially conscious capitalist who seeks wealth opportunities. Odd how people can only think in black and white optics.
BOE Price at posting:
$2.63 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
A personalised tool to help users track selected stocks. Delivering real-time notifications on price updates, announcements, and performance stats on each to help make informed investment decisions.
(20min delay)