Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 360

Thread: Climate Change

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    29,509
    Quote Originally Posted by flips333 View Post
    What are the consequence if we don't give them our money or don't meet the targets? Basically there are none, save some shaming. So how can a deal be so bad for us if we don't have to follow it?
    If I gave you a loan of $1,000,000 at a 75% interest rate but you did not have to pay the money back, would it be a bad loan for you because the interest rate is so high?

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    21,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Timmmahhh View Post
    Where does it say we're all supposed to be underwater by now?

    I mean, that's what you said. I don't see that nor have ever seen any reports stating by June 2017 we're all supposed to be underwater, so wondering where you got that info.
    in response to this.
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Not a lot of jobs in an underwater world unless we can all grow gills in the next 100 years.
    I didn't start it.
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Either care about all of it like a decent human being or shut the **** up and stop selective outrage based on whether it serves your political purposes.

    a person is smart. people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals.
    #TrumpDerangementSyndrome
    the anti-Trump movement seems to be getting dumber

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    24,776

    Climate Change

    Ah... the ol' "He started it" defense.

    That doesn't hold up anywhere; court, constructive debate/discussion, elementary school principal's office, etc.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,988
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    in response to this.


    I didn't start it.
    You were the one who made a blatantly false claim, so yes you did lol

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    27,089
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087:31714912
    I really want Rick Perry to focus his attention more on the state of our nuclear system, as is more the job of the Energy Secretary.
    Yeah this definitely falls more under the Secretary of Weather. Wait what? We don't have one? Noooooooooo


    Kristaps Porzingis
    Stronger than most 15 year old girls.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,009
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnyi View Post
    The biggest problem with the Paris Accord is that it is far too costly to the US and it's businesses and it is lopsided in the US contribution to the plan. Secondarily, it also gives up the US sovereignty to be regulated by an International body. Obama was a zealot and Climate Change was his religion, so he didn't mind having French and German overlords. He also didn't mind if China and India refused to play in the same sandbox and wouldn't have to meet the accord objectives until 2026 and 2030, respectively. He was also willing to overlook atrocities committed by other countries, as long as they agreed on Climate Change. He was also willing to bribe other countries by paying them $100 billion dollars per year, just to get them on board and he discounted the believe that it would cost the US economy $1 trillion per year for the rest of the century. For those kind of results, the US wouldn't need a costly war strapping our economy. In fact, the US wouldn't need to be attacked for external forces, since it was already being attacked by Obama.

    On the other hand, it might prevent an 0.3 degree rise in the planet temperature, if the US did absolutely nothing, which is not going to be the case, since technological breakthroughs and green energy will automatically be implemented throughout U.S. businesses over time. So, close to $100 trillion dollars spent and no guarantees and enslaved to an agreement that we might not be able to do, versus using that money elsewhere and plodding along on our own with what is more reasonable and fair to do.
    Please explain how it would have been too costly. Increasing CAFE standards saves consumers money because they do get better gas mileage year after year after year. Decreasing the CO2 in the air has a provable improvement on health care. Diseases like asthma are less in areas where there is less CO2 in the air and that means lower medical bills for sick people. Additionally the US would have moved its power creation methods from non-renewable sources to renewable ones, which would have meant that power production would be more stable and continuous year over year. Over the next four years, the US would have agreed to give $3B to poorer countries, nowhere near the mentioned $100B. In fact, China and India would probably incur most cost than we would because we have already been moving towards many of these goals for years.

    The part about the Obama administration attacking our country is just wholly unnecessary man. You are better than posts like that...I know it.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,009
    Good news everyone! There were no new coal jobs added from May to June 2017. Thankfully we might see that portion of the energy sector whither and die.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    28,172
    Quote Originally Posted by SpecialFNK View Post
    to conclude that everything is entirely because of man is ignorant. .
    You're the only person I've ever heard mention that conclusion..

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,009
    Quote Originally Posted by nastynice View Post
    You're the only person I've ever heard mention that conclusion..
    Enough hot air! Let's focus on the stalling and shrinking of one of the most dangerous professions for the poor folks who have to do the deadly work. That's a positive thing! Fewer black lung and mine cave ins is something to be elated to experience.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    99,878
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncos78087 View Post
    Good news everyone! There were no new coal jobs added from May to June 2017. Thankfully we might see that portion of the energy sector whither and die.
    Their was this coal mine that opened not that long ago, anyway it creates like 100 jobs, but the funny thing they were all praising Trump for it, but the fact was that that particular mine was green lit under Obama, only opened now because it took a moths to get the permits and so on.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,796
    Speaking of coal....I stumbled across this today. Not a Vox guy, but this was a good read.

    https://www.vox.com/energy-and-envir...gulations-coal

    Obama took a lot of heat from the coal industry for the decline of said industry. It's not that simple.

    I'm not gonna go FNK style, but here are a few bullet points. Read it to fill in the details.

    1. Coal cratered in 2011, with the four biggest coal companies combined market value dropping from $33 billion to $150 million, which is utterly STAGGERING. 3 of the 4 went bankrupt, 100,000+ pensions are in flux and 60,000 jobs were lost. Terrible.

    2. 60,000 jobs lost is not terrible nationally, but locally it's devastating. Those communities were wrecked.

    3. Why? Well, a report from Columbia, 49% of coal's market share was eaten up by natural gas, lower demand ate up 26%, renewables 18% and Obama regulations 3-5%.

    4. The "War on Coal" was thus most significantly led by cheap fracked natural gas, with more efficient fuel types and renewables lowering demand. China's decrease in demand also played a huge role, too.

    5. Trump's rollback won't do much. You can also read that there.


    So the question becomes, how to rebound and fix these communities. US Coal will never rebound to the levels it would need to to sustain these communities. It's not all Obama's fault...that's just the way the world is going. In a more perfect world we'd have renewable energy jobs for every person that lost their coal job, but we aren't there yet. I hope Trump holds true to his word and addresses the aforementioned pensions. I hope his budget proposal that slashes almost all the government funding that is allocated to go to these suffering communities doesn't happen. A serious approach to the opioid epidemic is much needed, too.

    These communities are not ever going to rebound because coal booms again. It's time for the Right to stop pretending that's the solution and start approaching it with any level of nuance laced in reality.
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,009
    The best thing to do is stop lying to people and feeding them politically easy lies that "coal is coming back". But that's not going to happen with the GOP feeding them myths about regulation being the sole downfall of coal. You need a plan, maybe a $30B plan like a certain emailing Secretary of State proposed in the last election.

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    99,878
    Accepting the Price was it?

    50k new coal jobs were made.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    72,796
    That 50,000 number shared to us by Scott Pruitt was an outright lie.

    The entirety of the coal industry is about 50,000 jobs. It's absurd to suggest that many jobs were added. By all accounts it was closer to 1,000 jobs. Coal production and shipment is up slightly, but again, we need to move on from this idea that the coal industry can ever rebound to where it was. Or that we'd want to. We want those people and communities to bounce back, but it just isn't going to be in coal. When the Trump administration shares those phony numbers with you it's for a reason...they want you to think it can come back. That's a counterproductive lie.

    This is the official BLS coal job data: https://beta.bls.gov/dataViewer/view...6.tc_instance6
    Hello there! Welcome to ManRam v8.00.
    Patch notes: This version is nice, funny, cool & good™ now

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    America
    Posts
    90,009
    If someone said that 50K coal jobs were created recently, they are #FakeNews


Page 3 of 24 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •