Sub's Alternative Energy Thread

[ShockerPrez]

When one side doesn't want an honest debate and demonizes the opposing side, while getting rich in the process, it should be kinda obvious what is going on. I cant think of any lefty climate activists that are poor. Except, maybe the brainwashed saps that super glue their hands to streets and destroy art.

The poor, however, are the real victims of these policies. Underdeveloped countries and the working poor in this country.

Heartless bastards.

[Kung Wu]

Not only is the agenda a hoax, it's a hoax that should be shouted down into oblivion as it could end up having seriously catastrophic consequences.

Why?

Because right now solar effects could be driving temperatures to levels we have never seen before. And that needs to be studied and understood thoroughly, stat. There needs to be funding to better understand ACTUAL root causes of dramatic climate changing events _out of human control_ and what the ramifications will be (e.g. intense electrical power requirements due to constantly pegged AC units all coming online at the same time). Which begs us to research how much fossil fuel it will take to deal with the new norms of increased temperatures (if they are indeed predicted).

The money that we _should_ be spending on the REAL cause of climate change and the REAL solutions to handling that climate change is instead being poured into a political money laundering machine leading to quacks making publicly embarrassing predictions based on agenda driven pseudo modeling.

That agenda could end up causing a catastrophic number of lives in the future by diverting funds from important research, if it's not shut down.

[Kung Wu]

I hate the spin so much. Media railing on Vivek for saying climate change is a fraud. He said climate change agenda is a fraud, and it is.

You're a 70's Democrat.

[WstateU]

I tell my cows to "just hold it in."

[1972Shocker]

It's kind of like the blm movement, in that, there is big money to be made

The amount of money that has been and will be made in the on the climate grift make the blm grift look like petty larceny.

[Atxshoxfan]

I hate the spin so much. Media railing on Vivek for saying climate change is a fraud. He said climate change agenda is a fraud, and it is.

It's kind of like the blm movement, in that, there is big money to be made.

Congressmen buy plenty of stock in a green energy company prior to giving them millions in taxpayer dollars. Then sell their shares after the big govt giveaway. Then company goes bankrupt because their products are too expensive for the average consumer, so Congress gives taxpayer dollars away to anyone who can afford the product, in the name of saving the planet.

[1972Shocker]

Moved.

[WuDrWu]

I hate the spin so much. Media railing on Vivek for saying climate change is a fraud. He said climate change agenda is a fraud, and it is.

[pinstripers]

Another thing that will starve people is killing cattle to stop cow farts. But Im guessing we're looking atca self fulfilling prophesy. It will go like this:

Kill the cows and retard food production to stop global warming.

When there isn't enough food and people starve, blame global warming for the lack of food.

I tell my cows to "just hold it in."

[Kung Wu]

Close, blame capitalism for the lack of food.

[ShockerPrez]

Another thing that will starve people is killing cattle to stop cow farts. But Im guessing we're looking atca self fulfilling prophesy. It will go like this:

Kill the cows and retard food production to stop global warming.

When there isn't enough food and people starve, blame global warming for the lack of food.

[1972Shocker]

Will New EPA Regulations Starve Millions Of People?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2023/08/will_new_epa_regulations_starve_millions_of_people.html

Two distinguished climate scientists have filed with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) a 45-page comment on the proposed regulation the EPA announced on May 11, 2023, setting emission standards that would require nearly all of coal- and gas-powered plants in the U.S.to capture almost all—90 percent—of their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by 2038 or shut down.

William Happer, professor of physics, emeritus, Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen, professor of Earth, atmospheric and planetary sciences, emeritus, make both a legal and a scientific case that the EPA’s proposed new rule is based on ideologically driven polices with no basis in legitimate climate science. In a document that appears to be the prelude to filing a lawsuit to block the EPA from implementing the proposed regulation, Happer and Lindzen lay out a science-based case arguing that the new EPA rules designed to limit the use of hydrocarbon fuels in the nation’s power plants could end up reducing the world’s food supply so dramatically that billions of people worldwide would be at risk of death by starvation.

In their comment, Happer and Lindzen demonstrated that the EPA (1) failed to consider critically important aspects and data concerning CO2 fossil fuels and climate change, and (2) relied on numerous studies that violate the scientific method. They concluded: “As a result, the Proposed Rule, which would eliminate fossil fuel electric plants that provide 61 percent of electricity in the United States, will be disastrous for the country, for no scientifically justifiable reason.”

Happer and Lindzen that demonstrated the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has ignored scientific data that proves there “is no risk that fossil fuels and carbon dioxide will cause catastrophic warming and extreme weather.”

• All of the models that predict catastrophic global warming fail the key test of the scientific method: they grossly overpredict the warming versus actual data.
• 600 million years of data prove that today’s CO2 level of 420 parts per million (ppm) is very low, not high.
• 600 million years of data show that higher levels of CO2 do not cause or even correlate with higher temperatures.

Even at today’s relatively low levels, atmospheric CO2 is now “heavily saturated,” in physics terms, meaning that additional increases in atmospheric CO2 can have little warming effect.

By citing Supreme Court precedents, Happer and Lindzen have put the EPA on notice that legitimate, credentialed, university-based climate scientists are amply prepared to contest how the EPA relied on IPCC pseudoscience to establish the basis for its ideologically driven climate hysteric policymaking. By putting their scientific climate credentials on the line, Happer and Lindzen have signaled a willingness to take to court a growing international greenlash against neo-Marxist climate hysterics whose true goal is to end the use of the hydrocarbon fuels upon which the modern industrial state depends. By emphasizing the benefit of increased CO2 to the production of food, Happer and Lindzen also expose the depopulation ambitions of the IPCC elite pushing an energy transition to wind, solar, and batteries.

[WstateU]

[1972Shocker]

If you are interested in reading the full article on the abandoned China EV's you can find that here: https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2...ev-graveyards/

The final comments from one of the Chinese photographers of these abandoned cars was:

“The shared bikes and EV graveyards are a result of unconstrained capitalism,” Wu said. “The waste of resources, the damage to the environment, the vanishing wealth, it’s a natural consequence.”

Not withstanding the wisdom of getting economic analysis from a Chinese photographer but seems to me like to problem was a heavily government subsidized program that fell apart when the subsidies disappeared and when better products started to show up. At best this is crony capitalism and more like the public-private partnerships our government seems to want to push which is basically fascism. Although pure, unconstrained capitalism can cause problems that does not appear to be the case here. Unrestrained government funding using taxpayer dollars resulted in an industry where the players had no skin in the game to speak of seems to be the catalyst.

A reasonably market based, reasonably regulated capitalist system would require that the players have their own resources at risk to reap the rewards of a successful enterprise or suffer the consequences of a bad outcome in a competitive environment.

[pinstripers]