You've got a point. I should have said 0% NET emissions.You are obviously well-versed on this subject. I have no problem with the goals stated. We are moving, slowly, to all-electric cars. If I was younger I would install solar panels on my house.
Joe Biden - "net-zero emissions no later than 2050" https://joebiden.com/climate-plan/
The Green New Deal, which Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Amy Kobuchar, and Kirsten Gillibrand signed onto, among others, calls for phasing out all fossil fuel extraction by 2030: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_New_Deal#Senators
Kamala Harris' campaign called for a net-zero carbon economy by 2045, and 100% carbon neutral buildings and zero emission vehicles by 2030. https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/...-leader--73379
Buttigieg like Biden was proposing net zero emissions by 2050: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...te-change-plan Originally Posted by Tiny
Tiny has good pointsthe green scam is part of the nazi playbook. the germans were parroting climate change in the 1930's when hitler was in power.
It is well established that the Earth has emerged from a global ice age about 11.000 years ago - just a mere a moment in geologic time frame.
The Earth is warming - and has had warming cooling cycles in the geologic past from an ice ball planet to a water planet.
How much of this warming change is Geologic inevitability - and how much is DPST/ccp propaganda that the US causes all global warming alone (per NYCrimies) - is debatable
Basically - the DPST/ccp party uses this issue to push a soylent Green New Deal agenda to destroy all oil and gas usage, and put in an impossible pipe dream - all government controlled - Orwellian AOC 'socialshit paradise". Read her soylent green New Deal - it will cost hundreds of Trillions ,and for what benefit to the world?
Questionable at best - since - as in teh Paris Accords we spend billions of $ on - the Russia, China, India, and other polluters get paid to pollute and laugh at us, while teh money goes down corrupt rat holes in these countries we pay to continue to pollute.
it is about ideology - and the NYcrimes has already closed any debate or difference of opinion on the matter in their (non) Editorial pages.
It is about the Socialshit Revolution - using teh climate as an excuse - to destroy representative democracy, and replace with a marxist totalitarian Orwellian dystopian nightmare.
Berni, AOC, Lizzie, and Comrade Xi are laughing at us, and placing themselves in the nomenklatura to continue to use their limos, jets, boats, and planes - and pollute - while everyone else starves and freezes in govenment crackerboxes with no heat, food, or shelter from the socialshit Storm Troops they will loose on Amerika! Originally Posted by oeb11
Questionable at best - since - as in teh Paris Accords we spend billions of $ on - the Russia, China, India, and other polluters get paid to pollute and laugh at us, while teh money goes down corrupt rat holes in these countries we pay to continue to pollute. Originally Posted by oeb11Yes, that's one of the big holes in the greenies argument. So we shut down our oil and gas industry. What good will that do when other countries collectively are emitting much more carbon than we ever were?
Yes, that's one of the big holes in the greenies argument. So we shut down our oil and gas industry. What good will that do when other countries collectively are emitting much more carbon than we ever were?those wind turbines are terrible to the grass lands they sit on. theyre ugly and the building and maintenance leads to soil erosion. plus they kill birds. i hate seeing them in west Texas.
Another big hole is that they want to shut down domestic production and exports of natural gas. This perversely may have the effect of increasing worldwide carbon emissions, as it may encourage greater use of coal for electricity generation.
I don't really see how you get away from burning natural gas, unless the price of batteries comes down a lot. I attended a presentation by an engineer with ERCOT, which is like the air traffic control system for electricity generators in Texas. The way it works is that we have substantial electricity generation from renewables when the wind is blowing, and to a lesser extent when the sun is shining. And we have natural gas generating plants, some of which are generating electricity all the time, and others which are constantly idling, ready to be put into full operation when needed.
Anyway, with natural gas and renewables we've got a good thing going. You can swap one for the other based on whether the wind is blowing and the sun is shining and based on the demand. We meet our energy needs economically, cleanly, and with a lot less carbon emissions than coal. I don't believe you can leave the coal fired plants idling, like the natural gas turbines, to accommodate fluctuating levels of demand.
We've managed to reduce our carbon emissions more than Europe because of our increased usage of natural gas. And the Democratic politicians want to kill that. I don't get it. Originally Posted by Tiny
plus they kill birds. Originally Posted by winn dixieNot saying you're wrong, but I really want to see some data around this. It's not like the blades of these windmills move so fast you can't see them, and I don't hear people saying the same thing about tall buildings, which birds do fly into, but not so much that it's hurting populations or migratory patterns.
Yes, that's one of the big holes in the greenies argument. So we shut down our oil and gas industry. What good will that do when other countries collectively are emitting much more carbon than we ever were?
Another big hole is that they want to shut down domestic production and exports of natural gas. This perversely may have the effect of increasing worldwide carbon emissions, as it may encourage greater use of coal for electricity generation.
I don't really see how you get away from burning natural gas, unless the price of batteries comes down a lot. I attended a presentation by an engineer with ERCOT, which is like the air traffic control system for electricity generators in Texas. The way it works is that we have substantial electricity generation from renewables when the wind is blowing, and to a lesser extent when the sun is shining. And we have natural gas generating plants, some of which are generating electricity all the time, and others which are constantly idling, ready to be put into full operation when needed.
Anyway, with natural gas and renewables we've got a good thing going. You can swap one for the other based on whether the wind is blowing and the sun is shining and based on the demand. We meet our energy needs economically, cleanly, and with a lot less carbon emissions than coal. I don't believe you can leave the coal fired plants idling, like the natural gas turbines, to accommodate fluctuating levels of demand.
We've managed to reduce our carbon emissions more than Europe because of our increased usage of natural gas. And the Democratic politicians want to kill that. I don't get it. Originally Posted by Tiny
My objection to this climate issue, is doing stupid things like killing the XL pipeline which will kill thousands of American jobs and will not reduce our carbon footprint in transporting that oil that will still be produced and used. Canada will be forced to build a pipeline west and transport that oil by sea and exported to other countries to refine and send it to the US by truck and train which will produce a larger carbon footprint. STUPID! but did you ever try and tell a religious fanatic that they are stupid?Energy security hasn't been an issue in recent years, because we became a net exporter. But think back. How much money have we pissed away in the Middle East on defense because that's where the oil was.
And to lose or recently found energy independence that took us decades to secure, is pure madness that will take us back to the days of being dependent on OPEC. Originally Posted by HedonistForever