Carbon Emissions since 2000
Comments
-
You mean like the science denial of the engineering fact that renewables can't support modern civilization?
California is full green future and actually has the geography to support it unlike most and we get regular blackouts and brownouts currently.
Just Wait until AI eats overcapacity during off-peak too.
-
My biggest fear from the current approach is that because of trillions of government funding of charging stations and other renewable electric energy investment and all the energy companies that are making bank on the handouts, they won't be willing to divest and write off assets if/when something that is much better, cleaner and cheaper comes along from the private sector. The government will kill it in the crib through nonsense regulation and continuing to provide huge subsidies to the inefficient stuff.
-
It's called LNG and we are already watching that.
-
No or negligeable effect. Climate scam is all about control. 15 minute cities, inability to travel, social credit/carbon scores to buy food etc. It is a one world government concocted hoax. You fell for it Big hook line and sinker. By the way the useful idiots and educated that are always the first to be executed in the commie world.
I'm old I've lived through Ice age! Acid Rain! Rain forrest gone! coral reefs gone! polar ice caps gone several tims! Water gone! Florida gone! and Al fucking Gore. You're just another truth denier. Show mw the ocean rise? Odd how all the people that said we'd be under water buy homes at the beach. Like Obunghole. Kerry burns more fossil fuels than everyone on this board and nore per day. You support these commie shits.
-
If you read my earlier comments, this isn't about removing fossil fuel consumption, it's about dialing it back to sustainable levels and ramping up other forms of energy that don't produce (or don't produce as much) CO2/other greenhouse gas emissions. This isn't all or nothing. Needs to happen. Nuclear is great.
-
How do you "dial it back" when demand already out paces supply?
"Renewable" energy production has essentially already peaked and is now a net negative investment for most places. I.e. you get less energy out than you put in. It's why it takes larger and larger subsidies to force the growth.
Your talking point about a "Green energy boom" is 8-10 years out of date.
Nuclear could work, but why then are all the people crying climate change deadset against it including policy makers?
Also, China is lying about "green energy". It's all for show while they build coal plants and laugh at the west committing suicide.
-
Nuclear could work, which means it's out.
-
You can also be for nuclear because the opposition will never allow it
-
You operate under a different mindset about humanity's relationship with the environment and therefore debate is impossible. I'm only here to open a few minds to the reality of climate change. Denying it is just pretty lame imo.
-
Debate being impossible is the goal for sure.
