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
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.
They being Musk and orange conman. Correct.
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 act
Fwiw the U.S. couldn’t presently have in many places massive amount of electric cars in a short time span .
I doubt they have the infrastructure for it.
I was watching this bit on breaking points and a hatchback self driving for $10,000 USA and some of the other models
"Americans currently have a real boomer mindset around Chinese cars...If these weren't from China I'd buy one in a heartbeat".
What a prick.
I .... agree ..... The Paris deal was .... largely performative.
However, the Inflation Reduction Act .... was actually a true leap forward.
LOL ..... No. The IRA was just window dressing. At its best projection, it reduces global emissions by 1% and still leaves the US with a per capita footprint which is 6-7x the global average recommended by the IPCC.
The IRA is the equivalent of sticking one's toe into the swimming pool ...... it's not a leap into the pool.
America can be as climate conscious as it can possibly be but ultimately its like hiding behind tent in a hurricane with rest of world activity
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
I didn't "doctor" your quote to change it's meaning whatsoever. I just shared the highlighted portions of it for brevity.
Doesn't change the fact that the IRA is more performative than substantive with respect to carbon reductions.
Share some math tame deuces . How much has America's carbon footprint declined as a result of the IRA ?
Alternatively .... acknowledge your gullibility.
I didn't "doctor" your quote to change it's meaning whatsoever. I just shared the highlighted portions of it for brevity.
Crosscutting and removing critical sentences to change the tone of a post from mild approval to making it sound like I view a piece of legislation as the second coming is certainly doctoring it, and it is certainly performative bullshit.
Doesn't change the fact that the IRA is more performative than substantive with respect to carbon reductions.
Share some math tame deuces . How much has America's carbon footprint declined as a result of the IRA ?
Alternatively .... acknowledge your gullibility.
It's a ten year plan with 2 years since passing and with its future now uncertain because as a nation the US prefers climate science deniers and morons in charge.
Projections of its effects on climate gases vary, but projections vary. An analysis from Princeton which seems serious enough estimated a reduction in greenhouse gases from peak level of 40% by 2030, compared to a reduction 27% without it.
There are analyses with more moderate projections, but I have seen none that indicate that this legislation does not have a genuine effect. As stated in my post in the sentence you originally removed when quoting, "not perfect by any means".
Of course, this is just one portion of its focus on pollution and green energy. The focus on attracting and generating business is impressive, and I both know of green business that resettled across the pond and I know people personally who went over and are working on an impressive green technology project.
Crosscutting and removing critical sentences to change the tone of a post from mild approval to making it sound like I view a piece of legislation as the second coming is certainly doctoring it, and it is certainly performative bullshit.
You're the one who wrote that it's a "true leap forward". Do you stand by that ?
The picture for renewable power is mixed, however. Last year, the United States added a record 32.3 gigawatts (up from 32.1 gigawatts prior to the IRA) of electric capacity to the grid from solar panels, wind turbines and batteries. But when the Inflation Reduction Act passed, analysts had projected that the United States would add an average of 46 to 79 gigawatts of carbon-free electricity to the grid annually in 2023 and 2024.
The IRA is a substantive DUD. It's vapor for gullible people who get sucked into superficial headlines.
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.
How do you define "bad faith" when it comes to Chinese electric cars which are far less expensive than American made models ?
And for the record ..... my perspective is all based upon a prioritization of human survival.
Paleo climate reconstruction suggests an Earth Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of close to 5C. ECS is the increase in Earth atmospheric temperature after reaching equilibrium to a doubling of greenhouse forcing (from CO2, methane and other GHG's).
We have doubled the CO2 equivalent in just the last century and now the Earth system is in the process of responding to the increase. Unless we come up with a way to quickly remove those added GHG's we are en route to an event which will not be survivable for the vast majority of the human race.
Generally speaking, if it did not present a threat to human survival, I would prefer capitalism > socialism.
But my priorities are that survival is the obvious #1 and if socialism is necessary for our species to survive, then so be it.
Your expressed priority is that capitalism is more important to you than survival. Which is sociopathic on the surface.
How do you define "bad faith" when it comes to Chinese electric cars which are far less expensive than American made models ?And for the record ..... my perspective is all based upon a prioritization of human survival. Paleo climate reconstruction suggests an Earth Climate Sensitivity (ECS) of close to 5C. ECS is the increase in Earth atmospheric temperature after reaching equi
This is poorly worded.
our species to survive /=/ survival
Lucy doesn't care about species or futur, he's just concerned about immediate benefits.
Btw I don't care about human survival either but that doesn't exclude me to have empathy for future generations.
Also we are already seeing effects so immediate benefits is kinda stupid take too.
Climate has always changed.
And species like ours have always gone extinct.
Our cities were built under a different climate system. Societal infrastructure is getting increasingly tested.
What happens when a critical mass of real estate becomes uninsurable ? Migration. Livable places begin shrinking. We have a significant population reduction event. The government doesn't need soldiers anymore. They can go after us with drone armies to cull undesirables. Drone border patrol.
Nut Nut has apparently never been to the middle of America.
You might have to buy boots and a snow shovel, but there is no shortage of livable space.
Also, no species like ours has ever gone extinct, because none have ever existed in the planet's history. If dinosaurs had a viable space program, they'd still be in charge. Humanity would be able to solve a minor problem like misbehaving space debris. Dinosaurs put all their points into STR and DEX and it bit them in the ass. INT gang rise up!
Lol. Dinosaurs were around for 165 million years. **** sapiens have no chance of making it another thousand years, and probably not more than a few hundred.
How ridiculous on the face of it. **** Sapiens are about 200,000 years old and you're pointing scoreboard at animals that were around for 1000 times as long as that.
Lol. Dinosaurs were around for 165 million years. **** sapiens have no chance of making it another thousand years, and probably not more than a few hundred.
How ridiculous on the face of it. **** Sapiens are about 200,000 years old and you're pointing scoreboard at animals that were around for 1000 times as long as that.
Meh, we'll probably survive but it's gonna be bad out there.
I don't think humanity is going to go extinct immediately because of climate change, but if it's not one thing it'll be another - climate, AI, nuclear war, biological war, something new...things are coming too fast and there are no mechanisms to stop them.
(I think the answer to Fermi's Paradox is pretty obvious)
165 million years of supremacy just to be taken out by a space rock? Pathetic.
Luckily, all you Debbie Downers are too busy being keyboard warriors to be out there affecting the path forward.
The internet is a societal pacifier, keeping the emo masses occupied and out of the way while humanity's finest are out there bringing science fiction into reality.
Also, no species like ours has ever gone extinct, because none have ever existed in the planet's history. If dinosaurs had a viable space program, they'd still be in charge.
Just on the human time scale, **** Sapiens have spent 95% of their time on Earth without technology beyond stone tools and 99.95% of their time without anything like this advanced technology. Pretty bold to suggest it's the solution to the existential problem we didn't have.
165 million years of supremacy just to be taken out by a space rock? Pathetic.
Luckily, all you Debbie Downers are too busy being keyboard warriors to be out there affecting the path forward.
The internet is a societal pacifier, keeping the emo masses occupied and out of the way while humanity's finest are out there bringing science fiction into reality.
Dunno man. I'd put what I have done up against what you have done.
Both of us are allowing ourselves to be distracted by nonsense in the middle of a weekday. We're both riding a short bus, and I don't really mind if you successfully argue that mine is shorter than yours.
Both of us are allowing ourselves to be distracted by nonsense in the middle of a weekday. We're both riding a short bus, and I don't really mind if you successfully argue that mine is shorter than yours.
Meh...I never totally stopped doing solar, but I've been doing software for the last 4 years or so as my main gig. The company I was working for laid off most of its employees including me in January. I've got some more solar/construction stuff in the works, but I'm not that busy yet.
Also, I'm pretty old.
eta: Not that I didn't post plenty when I was "busy".
I don't think humanity is going to go extinct immediately because of climate change, but if it's not one thing it'll be another - climate, AI, nuclear war, biological war, something new...things are coming too fast and there are no mechanisms to stop them.
(I think the answer to Fermi's Paradox is pretty obvious)
Obvious maybe but impossible
There is a mechanism to stop them - ****ing off from earth and dispersing. The window for extinction is too small for it to solve fermi's paradox. Even if extinctinction were extremely likely.
Nut Nut has apparently never been to the middle of America.You might have to buy boots and a snow shovel, but there is no shortage of livable space.Also, no species like ours has ever gone extinct, because none have ever existed in the planet's history. If dinosaurs had a viable space program, they'd still be in charge. Humanity would be able to solve a minor problem like mis
Sure .
Climate change isn’t problem because losing 50% of the population doesn’t mean extinction of the species like the dinosaur, so we all good .
