Stupidity of "switch to electric" while killing power generation
Is there anything these people do that doesn't result in absolute failure?
I don't think it is possible to write a computer program that can forecast the temperature in 100 years. I think that notion is absurd. We should do what we have always done - and has already created a cleaner and more prosperous world than 50 years ago - which is to make ever more efficient use of the resources at hand. It is inevitable that new energy sources will be required - but it won't be wind or solar. While we pursue those dead ends, we are both making ourselves weaker and less able to find solutions that will work.
Quite literally their entire schtick is to create or worsen an existing problem and then point and say that we need to give up something to "fix" it.
Immigration, bank failures, guns, taxes, you name it, they fucked it up and want us to give something up to fix it. I'd say a good place to start with is giving up leftists. Throwing them into volcanoes to appease the God of CO2 has a nice ring to it for being utterly barbaric, plus it has a much better chance of actually fixing the problem since we will be getting rid of the creators of said problems.
The atmosphere is roughly .04% carbon dioxide. Although I agree that spewing tons of it into the atmosphere is not great, the biggest offenders are not being penalized for it (Greta, kindly see China). Instead, it has been monetized into a carbon credit ponzi scheme that only shuffles the credits around to bigger companies who can afford it. A perfect example of this was the interview with Bill Gates who stated that many people will soon simply not be able to fly on airplanes as often as they would like. Then the interviewer asked how Bill reconciled that with his private plane and his worldwide jaunts at any whim. Bill was adamant that he was exempt because he offsets with carbon credits and besides, he’s a philanthropist (lol).
The overall balance of carbon dioxide production has to also be balanced against several different factors, including but not limited to: comparing the levels produced by volcanoes and other natural disasters, the methane released by the US bombing the Nordstream 2 and other such man made disasters, mining causing emissions and other harmful substances being released from mining for lithium and other chemicals needed for EV’s, the carbon dioxide created by all of the solar panel parts being primarily made in China requiring transportation, etc...
Global warming driven by man-made CO2 is a hoax that powers a scam. That’s all there is. How do we know? 1) The supporting evidence is missing or contradicted. 2) The proponents must commit data crimes to make their case. 3) The proponents behave hypocritically, i.e., they own expensive beach houses, multiple large homes, fly in private jets, etc. 4) Most of the lead proponents are failed politicians that turned to this as a way to make money. 5) The solutions are not economically viable. Things that might be solutions that are economically viable (i.e., nuclear) are off the table. The proponents aren’t able to make money off that. 6) The solutions require gov’t regulation and subsidies. 7) There’s a lot of money to be made, but almost no progress. Yet the proponents keep getting rich.
Plants needs CO2. Without it, just like human without oxygen , they will die.
This is the first sensible thing I have read in a long time. Really, if electricity is the sole technology for powering our home and our cars, we will soon be living in a third world country. And the absurd Net Zero program only ensures that result.
I planned to keep my gas car until it died. I expect that to be awhile because it is a fine German car.
On the question of Carbon Dioxide... Not convinced of the 'danger'.
Rushed off to Dr Google, which told me that "Concentrations of CO 2 in the atmosphere were as high as 4,000 ppm during the Cambrian period about 500 million years ago, when the concentration was 20 times greater than today, and as low as 180 ppm during the Quaternary glaciation of the last two million years."
The current level is about 418ppm.
I'm not at all sure about the atmospheric theories of gross temperature change. After slowing down over a long period the earth has just begun to accelerate again. @EthicalSkeptic on twitter asked the question about what is more likely to be warming oceans - the atmosphere above or fluxes of heat from the earth below.
Jury is still out.
CO2 is plant food. the solution is more plants to convert the CO2 into oxygen.
and more ‘closed circle’ systems, like hemp biodiesel - the crop cleans earth and air which balances out the exhaust from the fuel.
the geoengineering should also stop. it has never had a safety study done in the 100 years of being deployed in our environment.
i think it’s worse than covid science.
How dare you! Reality is undefeated. ESG is a demoralized social credit system that must be stopped: https://yuribezmenov.substack.com/p/how-to-raise-your-esg-score
The same issues that are seeing within the medical field (where cheap and effective therapies are capped off the market to protect the monopoly for ineffective but lucrative therapies) also exists and other sectors particularly energy.
There are energy technologies I know of, such as thorium nuclear reactors which easily and cleanly provide the energy that is needed to run society, and there are ways to store that energy (e.g. converting water to hydrogen and oxygen and then burning it as needed) which would achieve all the policy goals being described. The problem with that approach is that it would destroy the existing energy sector, and, it would no longer make energy be a limited life essential resource whose scarcity can be used to easily control the population.
In the years that I have watched the climate change and energy debate, I have consistently observed that the focus has been on coming up with justifications for more control (all cars being electrical significantly reduces your ability to be independent from the system) and shooting for nebulous targets which can never be reached to justify those policies (e.g. stopping climate change or having a fusion breakthrough in the far distant future).
As a long time environmentalist, this is very frustrating because I watch the anti-carbon dioxide movement hijack the environmental movement so that it no longer focused on legitimate sources of pollution, AND instead had everybody fixate on the demon of carbon dioxide. The recent disaster in East Palestine is an excellent example: in previous eras, environmentalists would have been incensed over it, but nowadays almost none of them care.
Solid. I disagree with something here. It's not virtue signaling for California and NY to mandate switching to electrical. It's just plain old corruption wrapped in pretend concern for the environment.
What do I think? I think everyone is brainwashed into the illusion of never ending growth, and that the brainwashed have the hubris tho think their shit don't smell.
I just read the book, Climate Chaos, and though the authors, two anthropologists assert: "The science is settled" on anthropogenic climate change, they mostly show how cultures have survived, or failed to survive severe climate change in the last 30,000 years. Their analysis is that societies that imposed top down solutions did not survive, and that those that implemented local solutions and relied upon clan, family, village level solutions did, or simply moved.
So I still think electric cars are a bunch of hype providing a hog trough by the feds for those who don't need it.
As for CO2 in the atmosphere, I think plastics are going to frack us (and every other living creature on the planet) up way before warming, or the next ice age, drive us toward extinction.
Thanks for the article!
My daughter lives on the North Side of Chicago is getting an Electric Car. I used these arguments to try to dissuade her, but she was adamant and is getting it. she will have to learn on her own.
"The believer is happy. The doubter is wise."- Edgar Allan Poe
All "green" technologies are scams. The great science fiction writer, Michael Crichton, pointed this out years ago and explained why. And not only are these people who support green products thieves and liars, as the late great Vaclav Havel pointed, the environmentalists are the new communists because the whole point is to destroy western societies through destruction of the energy system. These people don't even believe in their own rules and propaganda. Obama had installed last fall at his estate on Martha's Vineyard two propane tanks with a capacity of 25,000 lbs. Why didn't he put up a windmill or a large # of panels? Because he knows they don't work and generate very little usable energy and it can't be saved to when it's needed. But hydrocarbons can.