Unemployment Under Biden

[rexdutchman]

china first its all good

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by Tiny

You've got a point. I should have said 0% NET emissions.

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

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.

It comes down to whether or not one believes that our planet is slowly getting warmer and that it is caused by man.

[rexdutchman]

Zero emissions what a joke , hold it don't FART ,,,

[oeb11]

Tiny has good points


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!

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by oeb11

Tiny has good points

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!

the green scam is part of the nazi playbook. the germans were parroting climate change in the 1930's when hitler was in power.


the dpst fascists is using their playbook.

[Lucas McCain]

Everything will be just fine. Unlike Trump's stupid ass, Biden will not interfere with his teams that know more than him. Glad that inept fucker Trump is done ruining this country. Biden sucks as I've said before, but anyone is better than Trump's stupid ass.

[Tiny]

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.

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.

[winn dixie]

Originally Posted by Tiny

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.

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.

[GastonGlock]

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

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.

I like seeing them. But then I like seeing pumping units and gas plants too.

[Tiny]

Good post Gaston

[GastonGlock]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

plus they kill birds.

Not 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.

[HedonistForever]

Originally Posted by Tiny

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.

Like a few other topics, it's hard to "get" what fanatics believe because it is rarely based on sense but on a religious like zealotry.


From what I read and hear, the US is the only country in the world meeting the goal it set for itself during the climate talks, so why do we need to involve ourselves with countries unwilling or unable to meet these goals that will require the US to sent hundreds of billions of dollars to these countries that they will surely waste.


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?


Then there is the money. Money we don't have to try and stop China and India and other non-industrialized countries from burning coal which they will continue to do so as not to wreck their economy and have civil revolt on their hands by people who can't feed and warm themselves in the ways they have been using for years and will continue to use.


Of course we should be doing everything possible to reduce carbon emissions and we are but not at the expense of giving billions to other countries who will piss it away as always and not at the expense of jobs and lower energy bills here.


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.


Talk about giving Russia and China what they want. Russia and China both become wealthier as we become poorer by producing less natural gas and oil.


If you are wondering what Putin and Xi were raising their champagne glasses to, it was the election of Joe Biden. "We have much to celebrate Comrade".

[oeb11]

Tiny - Amen , Good Sir!!!
You describe the DPST/ccp religious zealots to a 'T'!

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by HedonistForever

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?

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.

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.

While it was a little before my time, I think people had to wait in gasoline lines for hours back in 1973 and 1974 because of the Arab oil embargo. The embargo occurred because of the U.S.'s support for Israel in the 1973 war.

Also, remember when OPEC jacked the price of oil up. Gasoline prices went up. Some people were spending more on gasoline than food. And then there's the effect on our trade deficit. In inflation adjusted dollars, I bet we used to run up higher deficits with the oil exporters than we do now with China. The oil exporters had us completely over a barrel, no pun intended.

And so we have an opportunity for a pipeline across American soil, to American refiners, that would transport Canadian oil. The market for oil and refined products is global. As you say the Canadians can sell it to anyone. If it isn't transported by pipeline, it will be transported by rail or trucks, which uses up more energy and isn't as safe.

Our refiners can export the products they refine from Canadian oil, or they can be consumed here. Yeah, right now, at this moment in time, we don't need the oil for energy security. But you can pretty much be guaranteed if people like Sanders, Warren or AOC rule the roost we're going to be on our knees again, just like we were from the 1970's straight on up until the last decade, when fracking and horizontal drilling bailed us out and boosted our oil production several fold.

I'm no expert in electric vehicles but have read that having a lot of them is going to require huge investment in manufacturing, and also lots of dirt will have to be moved and lots of ore refined, mostly in foreign countries, to extract the lithium, cobalt, nickel and rare earth metals that will be required to make the batteries. This is not going to happen overnight. In the interim why cut the head off the American oil and gas industry?

Biden has chosen not to go after production on private lands in the U.S., yet. However he has already shut down development of federal lands and offshore. And that may be a first step.