Climate Change - increasingly horrible disasters loom
...............
there is so much out there about this - I don't really need to provide a lot of sources - a quick google
What would be childish is if you alter your life to eliminate gas cars, red meat, milk, and live under strict control in a 15 minute city where you need special permission to leave (due to "climate change" reasons) when no one can even be certain if these things will even make a dent in "climate change".
If we knew 100% that by doing this it will immediately clean up the environment, then we can start discussing it but without all the control mechanisms snuck into these scam communist programs. The DS is currently being dismantled and I also know they found evidence that numbers were skewed and people were paid to put out false information (a TWC report is one example).
So yes, I believe the climate is changing, and probably a small part of it is due to emissions but not enough to make these drastic changes in our lives where we're only guessing if it will help.
Where's the conclusion that shows by eliminating cars and cows it will stop "climate change"? There is none, it's just a hypotheses and theory, just like oil comes from dead dinosaurs.
If you look at the circular graph that shows how each segment is affecting global warming you will see that transportation is about 15% and agriculture (including cows) is about 22%. Production of energy is at 34% and industry is 24% and construction is at 6%. So eliminating gas powered cars/buses and all cows would only affect about 30% of gas emissions.
By producing energy using clean energy sources (including nuclear power) and moving towards electric and hydrogen powered vehicles that would reduce close to half of the gas emissions.
I doubt that people will stop eating meat. But there are some medical ideas now that hope to reduce methane production by cows (burping mostly). They haven't passed FDA yet but in theory could reduce animal production of methane by 80%.
Where exactly did the data come from? It was warmer in the 90's, that's why they had to change it from "global warming" to "climate change" (they probably had a meeting and as a safeguard they figured no one would dispute that bc the climates always changing anyway).
Not sure where you are getting your data from but it was not warmer in the 1990's than in the past 20 years. The last ten years are hotter than ever before. There might have been one year in the 1990's that was close to the past 24 years of high heat. See this article
There was a year in the 1990's that set the record for hotness and then after that there were some cold years. So the ten year average of temperatures started to drop. But using 10 year averages was stupid. When I looked at all of the data produced by NASA (I believe) in 2014 it turns out that if you use 20 year averages, the average temperature increased every year since 1966. If you use 25 year averages temperatures have been increasing every year since 1970. 15 year averages stops at about 1978.
I stopped looking at it in 2014 but temperatures have been rising since. The last ten years have basically been the hottest ten years.
We've only been tracking weather and temperature over the past 150 years, and you really should wait until the DOGEcoin team finishes their investigations of NOAA, NASA, and other agencies where all the "data" comes from to see how it was manipulated to look more dangerous just to scare you into their agenda2030/green new deal scams. These are more about control than the climate.
Data wasn't manipulated by NASA. In the 1990's the data was used to show that Global Warming was a myth. Which it wasn't.
What would be childish is if you alter your life to eliminate gas cars, red meat, milk, and live under strict control in a 15 minute city where you need special permission to leave (due to "climate change" reasons) when no one can even be certain if these things will even make a dent in "climate change". If we knew 100% that by doing this it will immediately clean up the enviro
I altered my life to eliminate gas cars, meat (though not for environmental reasons), and milk to some extent (I eat cheese). But I don't live under strict control. And I don't try to control others in my life. My children eat meat. My wife has a gas powered hybrid car and my daughter recently bought a gas powered car.
But I do hope that major cities in the US ban gas powered cars. This will not only help the climate but will save lives lost from air polution (between 5 million and 10 million people die each year worldwide from air pollution). I do hope that all schools start using electric school buses. I do hope that electric companies all move to clean energy power (which in the end will be cheaper for all people). I also hope that reducing methane emissions from animals works because I think there is zero chance people will start eating less meat around the world.
In 2014 a parent of a child at a school my son went to was a conservative wealthy man. He said much of what playbig said. I did my research and told him the results. He became a believer of global warming and decided to be on the side of trying to make the world a better place for his kids.
You never know when somebody will figure it out. Especially if they have young relatives who they love and want to have the bets chance of a long life.
Also, there are people who read here who don't post. If it changes just one person's POV I will be glad I did it...
I never doubted that we're emitting "green house gases" and that the climate is changing.
I disagree that we can prevent, stop or reverse "climate change" by one or two countries on the planet outlawing gas cars and cows. It's just an assumption.
I never doubted that we're emitting "green house gases" and that the climate is changing.
I disagree that we can prevent, stop or reverse "climate change" by one or two countries on the planet outlawing gas cars and cows. It's just an assumption.
What you are saying is true. But we can lead by example. And it isn't about outlawing gas cars all at once. Rural areas will likely have gas cars for awhile. Its about reducing the purchase of new gas cars. I also think that when US large cities remove gas powered vehicles there will be a decrease in air pollution and an increase in lives saved. In 2021 over 60,000 people in the US died early deaths from air pollution.
I doubt there will ever be the outlawing of cows. But there may be ways to reduce pollution caused by cows. As I mentioned before there is a potential drug for cows that would reduce methane release from burping by 80%.
As industrialized countries move towards clean energy it will make it clear that if everyone does it there will be big reductions in CO2 and methane in the environment.
There will be countries like Russia that will likely never move in that direction. But hopefully there will be very few of them.
The Paris accord was a way for all countries to move in the right direction. Now that the US has removed itself (again) there will be other countries that will go to what they see as better economics for their industries. My guess though is that when Trump leaves the US will once again join and start reducing methane and CO2.
What you are saying is true. But we can lead by example. And it isn't about outlawing gas cars all at once. Rural areas will likely have gas cars for awhile. Its about reducing the purchase of new gas cars. I also think that when US large cities remove gas powered vehicles there will be a decrease in air pollution and an increase in lives saved. In 2021 over 60,000 people
Your making the assumption that Electric cars are better for the environment and overall . Yes they produce limited zero emissions but
- In order to charge them you are emitting carbon
- They are haevier and were out our roads quicker
- The weight also impacts accidents and the size of insurance claims
- Most cities electrical grids are stretched to capacity
- The minerals required for the batteries are mined in many places were no concern for the environment exists
- Many of these mines use child labor or slave labor
- THe Paris accord is a bad deal as it gives China and India huge concessions
- Most countries have zero or little chance of meeting their targets
Look at a country that has a leader that when elected pledged to end all coal exports by 2030 yet since elected has risen every year the amount of US coal leaving CDN ports and Regional coal leaving CDN ports . Your crazy if you think he will just cut it off in 2030.
Your making the assumption that Electric cars are better for the environment and overall . Yes they produce limited zero emissions but Look at a country that has a leader that when elected pledged to end all coal exports by 2030 yet since elected has risen every year the amount of US coal leaving CDN ports and Regional coal leaving CDN ports . Your crazy if you think he will j
Charging electric cars will get better over time as energy becomes more and more produced in a clean way (water, air, sun, nuclear).
Electric cars are heavier but in many cases don't wear out roads quicker than say SUV's, trucks, and buses (trucks are the main contributor to need for road repairs).
NY State runs a program so people will mostly charge their cars at night so the pressure on day time energy production is reduced. My guess is that other states either do that or will do that.
Minerals required for car batteries do cause environmental problems, but my understanding is that energy savings including production of electric cars and batteries starts at about 2 years for electric cars (now). When I did the math on my electric car, I get roughly the equivalent of 120 mpg in the winter and 150 mpg in the summer. My Prius Hybrid used to get about 45 mpg (a little more in summer and a little less in winter)
The other thing to understand is that gas powered cars use about 12% to 30% of the energy that gas explosions in pistons generate to actually go down the road. Electric cars use about 90% of the energy stored in their batteries to get their cars down the road. [URL="https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2024/01/electric-vehicles-use-half-the-energy-of-gas-powered-vehicles/"]Here is the article on this subject
[/URL] and here is another one
January 2025 came as a record setter.
1.75C above the 1850-1900 baseline.
Obama's Paris deal was always a sham with zero commitments or jurisdiction. I know that Trump is the poster child for climate disaster, but the substantive position vs Democrats is tiny. The establishment Democratic position is largely performative.
even radical leftists like labor are understanding unfiltered immigration is toxic and hated by most normal people
Home Office
UK to refuse citizenship to refugees who have ‘made a dangerous journey’
What you are saying is true. But we can lead by example. And it isn't about outlawing gas cars all at once. Rural areas will likely have gas cars for awhile. Its about reducing the purchase of new gas cars. I also think that when US large cities remove gas powered vehicles there will be a decrease in air pollution and an increase in lives saved. In 2021 over 60,000 people
No it wasn't.
The Paris accord was a way for first world countries to self-handicap themselves while everyone else did the **** he wanted.
Normal countries where western-style academic leftism doesn't have political power ALWAYS ONLY DO what they think it's best for their economies and industries. That's like the only golden rule of every society in world history EXCEPT when western-style modern radical leftism gets power.
It's only western style modern radical leftism that follows a morals of self-deprecation and economic suicide, normal marxists never did, and everyone else never did.
Doing what you think is best for the material prosperity of your society was the golden rule of all societies in human history TILL the suicidal, anti-human modern radical left arrived.
Charging electric cars will get better over time as energy becomes more and more produced in a clean way (water, air, sun, nuclear).Electric cars are heavier but in many cases don't wear out roads quicker than say SUV's, trucks, and buses (trucks are the main contributor to need for road repairs).NY State runs a program so people will mostly charge their cars at night so the pr
Ok let’s say Electric cars are the best solution than why are we not allowing BYD Chinese electric cars into the country? Experts say they are better than anything produced here in the USA and affordable.
If the argument is well they are heavily subsidized so was Tesla
Ok let’s say Electric cars are the best solution than why are we not allowing BYD Chinese electric cars into the country? Experts say they are better than anything produced here in the USA and affordable.
If the argument is well they are heavily subsidized so was Tesla
Because they are in bad faith, same as the leftists who cry about climate change but aren't willing to allow the country to invest in nuclear massively.
They don't want to fix any problem, they want problems to exist and be perceived as bigger threats than they are, to install socialism. Just read what nutnut writes, that's the whole idea.
January 2025 came as a record setter.
1.75C above the 1850-1900 baseline.
Obama's Paris deal was always a sham with zero commitments or jurisdiction. I know that Trump is the poster child for climate disaster, but the substantive position vs Democrats is tiny. The establishment Democratic position is largely performative.
I would agree with the initial assessment. The Paris deal was like many other policies from the Obama administration, largely performative.
However, the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration was actually a true leap forward. Not perfect by any means, but it was very good compared to previous US initiatives.
Of course, when the current administration is done, it will probably only remain as a useless carcass.
I would agree with the initial assessment. The Paris deal was like many other policies from the Obama administration, largely performative.However, the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration was actually a true leap forward. Not perfect by any means, but it was very good compared to previous US initiatives.
Red states are installing more renewables than blue states
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro...
...In other words, Prabhu said, red states are “blowing many blue states out of the water in terms of [clean energy] investment because the resource tends to be better in red states.”
I would agree with the initial assessment. The Paris deal was like many other policies from the Obama administration, largely performative.However, the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration was actually a true leap forward. Not perfect by any means, but it was very good compared to previous US initiatives. Of course, when the current administration is done, it
Red states are installing more renewables than blue states
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-enviro...
...In other words, Prabhu said, red states are “blowing many blue states out of the water in terms of [clean energy] investment because the resource tends to be better in red states.”
I think you are missing the point of the article.
Red States have increased clean energy production significantly since the Inflation Reduction Act. In part its because federal aid increased from 30% to 50% for renewable energy construction. In part its because wind and solar energy are much more available in Red States and labor is much cheaper because it is mostly rural areas in Red States that are upgrading.
Its also fair to note that Texas led the nation in wind energy since George W Bush was Governor. Unfortunately when he was president he didn't pursue it on a national level.
What tame_deuces is getting at is that Trump is trying to kill Biden's Inflation Reduction Act because he wants to end construction of wind energy everywhere in the US. In part its because he hates wind turbines because they were installed off the coast of one of his golf courses and he couldn't stop it. In part its because the Republican party gets 97% of political contributions from oil, gas, and coal companies.
If Trump succeeds in gutting the act it would likely reduce clean energy construction everywhere. For now. But moving forward what the article points out is that when you construct wind and solar energy you know the basic cost of electricity for 30 years. With gas, oil, and coal plants you don't. The price will be based on the cost of the fuel.
I think you are missing the point of the article.Red States have increased clean energy production significantly since the Inflation Reduction Act. In part its because federal aid increased from 30% to 50% for renewable energy construction. In part its because wind and solar energy are much more available in Red States and labor is much cheaper because it is mostly rural area
No it's a structural trend that well predates the inominous, fraudulently called "inflation reduction Act" of 2022
Yes it is because red states have more wind and solar to "exploit", sure. And obviously , and most importantly, because red states have less red tape, which always strangles all economic activity.
Ok let’s say Electric cars are the best solution than why are we not allowing BYD Chinese electric cars into the country? Experts say they are better than anything produced here in the USA and affordable.
If the argument is well they are heavily subsidized so was Tesla
Personally I think this was Biden's biggest mistake.
The sale price of the Chinese electric cars was something like $12,000. If I had been Biden I would have encouraged massive (millions) imports of those cars and would have reduced the tariffs to maybe 10% (like all European countries --- whereas Japan is at 0%) But Biden put the tariff at 100%.
The reason Biden did it was to maintain support from car manufacturing states in the US. Like Michigan, North Carolina, Illinois, Nevada, etc. I also think he did it so US car companies wouldn't stop making electric cars --- but some have slowed production down anyway because post sales maintenance of EV cars is much less than gas powered cars so dealerships don't want to sell them...
I think it was unbelievably stupid because the price of cars skyrocketed as a result of Covid and offering cheap EV cars would have been a huge decrease in car prices and potentially inflation overall. It also would have competed primarily with non US cars like Mini-Coopers, Hondas, Nissan, Volkswagon, Hundai, etc. as well as a lot of small hybrids.
It would also have been the first cheap electric car (well aside from the Chevy Bolt which isn't being mass produced)
Personally I think this was Biden's biggest mistake. The sale price of the Chinese electric cars was something like $12,000. If I had been Biden I would have encouraged massive (millions) imports of those cars and would have reduced the tariffs to maybe 10% (like all European countries --- whereas Japan is at 0%) But Biden put the tariff at 100%.The reason Biden did it was t
Democrats had the upper hand to gain moderate voters with economic knowledge by having sane ideas about tariffs ("tariffs are bad"), and they completly squandered it by imposing insane tariffs on EVs.
ut at least by doing so they made clear forever that all the climate change apocalypse talk they subscribe to is complete nonsense, because if they ever believed it even in part, they wouldn't put tariffs on EVs (or anything else that helps the "green transition" in any way).
Because they are in bad faith, same as the leftists who cry about climate change but aren't willing to allow the country to invest in nuclear massively.
They don't want to fix any problem, they want problems to exist and be perceived as bigger threats than they are, to install socialism. Just read what nutnut writes, that's the whole idea.
lol .
You are against the left .
You think the left is evil .
(Hopefully you think communism is even worst then socialism…😉
You blame government fighting “ pure evil” communism by restricting some commerce with them for their own economic prosperity?
That’s freakn hilarious …
Let help the biggest polluter in the world and leftish regime to thrive on our back lol .
Pure gold luciom .
Personally I think this was Biden's biggest mistake. The sale price of the Chinese electric cars was something like $12,000. If I had been Biden I would have encouraged massive (millions) imports of those cars and would have reduced the tariffs to maybe 10% (like all European countries --- whereas Japan is at 0%) But Biden put the tariff at 100%.The reason Biden did it was t
I was watching this bit on breaking points and a hatchback self driving for $10,000 USA and some of the other models
Broken YouTube Link
100% tariff wasn't enough for Musk so he became a Trump supporter when Trump promised a 300% tariff. After election Trump has been saying 200%.
It's not only the entry level models which are priced insanely well by BYD and would actually allow first time buyers, or poor people in general, easy access to individual transportation, it's also in the 20-25k USD range that they have features you need to spend double or more to get from European or American models.
At some point on top of the clarification that they never actually meant it about the climate, you can start thinking they actually don't want the masses to be able to afford a vehicle anymore.
