Cheap clean energy has broken the old trade-off between raising living standards and cutting environmental harm.

batteries Storage as the thing that decides how much intermittent generation is worth building.

On the topicDo we shrink our way out of the climate problem, or grow our way out?under our view: Cheap energy is what made prosperity and lower impact stop being opposites

A private bookmark. Not a position, and never counted.

What they actually said

Word for word, with the source under each one. They did not write this page.

Holders over time

Do you hold this korrent?Do you also believe this?

In tension with

Breaking the trade-off between prosperity and the environment is an opportunity rather than something that will happen on its own.

These are the two halves of Ritchie’s own argument and they pull against each other on purpose: the deadlock has started to break, and there is no law that says it will keep breaking. She holds both, and the second is the sentence she says she always adds.
In tension with

The climate policy everyone has quietly assumed is that poorer countries stay poor, and that is the wrong answer.

Handmer and Ritchie both hold that cheap clean energy has broken the old trade-off, and they disagree about what follows. Handmer treats the outcome as an inevitability that the default climate discourse is too pessimistic to see; Ritchie insists in the same breath that it is an opportunity and not an inevitability. Agreement about the fact and disagreement about the modality is the more interesting half.

Our reading — they may agree, disagree or merely touch the same thing. Closest first: a shared subject counts for most, then how near the wording is.