a compromised president…refusing to US oil under the pretext of green energy
“ While the administration touts “clean” alternatives, enhanced reliance on Russian and Iranian oil imports will only serve to raise global methane emissions, the most potent greenhouse gas.
According to the International Energy Agency’s global methane tracker, Russia was the world’s leading producer of methane emissions last year with its oil and gas operations producing 30 percent more per unit of production than the United States. Iranian producers emitted 85 percent more methane per unit of production when compared to U.S. operators.”
https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/05/russian-oil-and-gas-operations-emit-30-percent-more-methane-than-american-producers/
@mott-the-hoople saidWhy is the US president compromised?
a compromised president…refusing to US oil under the pretext of green energy
“ While the administration touts “clean” alternatives, enhanced reliance on Russian and Iranian oil imports will only serve to raise global methane emissions, the most potent greenhouse gas.
According to the International Energy Agency’s global methane tracker, Russia was the world’s ...[text shortened]... .com/2022/03/05/russian-oil-and-gas-operations-emit-30-percent-more-methane-than-american-producers/
What does “refusing to US oil” mean?
But, I reckon more importantly, you do realise that oil is finite?
And that the world population will grow until 2100 (that’s when it evens out and will probably start shrinking a bit: https://population.un.org/wpp/ ).
This means for the coming 70-odd years more and more people will be using oil. And it’s finite. Which means we’re going to run out of it.
So what would be your solution? Obviously importing unclean oil and gas is contra-productive, but what do you think we should be doing? For the next 50 years or so?
Do you really think that a short term solution like digging for more oil is worth the costs it brings with it?
Or do you think that the prime investment should be in alternatives which are sustainable?
And if so, what do you do in the meantime?
@shavixmir saidPrivatise the whole thing, stop subsidizing fickle wasteful green energy, let those that want to dig for oil, dig for oil. If you don't want to use it, (now prepare yourself for this shag, it's going to blow your mind) then don't use it.
Why is the US president compromised?
What does “refusing to US oil” mean?
But, I reckon more importantly, you do realise that oil is finite?
And that the world population will grow until 2100 (that’s when it evens out and will probably start shrinking a bit: https://population.un.org/wpp/ ).
This means for the coming 70-odd years more and more people will be using o ...[text shortened]... estment should be in alternatives which are sustainable?
And if so, what do you do in the meantime?
You decide what is a 'prime investment' for you. Let others decide what is a 'prime investment' for them.
@wajoma saidYou do comprehend that digging up the whole planet for something that’s going to run out anyways, is completely pointless?
Privatise the whole thing, stop subsidizing fickle wasteful green energy, let those that want to dig for oil, dig for oil. If you don't want to use it, (now prepare yourself for this shag, it's going to blow your mind) then don't use it.
You decide what is a 'prime investment' for you. Let others decide what is a 'prime investment' for them.
Your free market approach works whe talking about butchers and bakers and candlestick makers.
It doesn’t work out so well when oligarchs finance madmen and do anything they want for a few pennies.
@shavixmir saidIt works because as oil becomes more difficult to extract the cost creeps up and one day in the distant future the green thing may start to compete.
You do comprehend that digging up the whole planet for something that’s going to run out anyways, is completely pointless?
Your free market approach works whe talking about butchers and bakers and candlestick makers.
It doesn’t work out so well when oligarchs finance madmen and do anything they want for a few pennies.
Gasoline is still an incredibly cheap energy source when you take out the taxes, in NZ it's up around $3 a liter, over half of that is tax, it's funny in a sick bitter way when fuel Co's want to put the price up the NZ goobermint is quick to play the same tired old tune 'greed, greed, greed' when they're raping motorists with tax.
The technology and effort that goes into delivering fuel to the pump, often in some of the harshest environments in the world, it's close to miraculous, they should be getting medals not parasitical hypocritical pollies lecturing them about greed and punishing them with taxes.
@shavixmir saidOil will never run out. It will become too expensive to run out.
You do comprehend that digging up the whole planet for something that’s going to run out anyways, is completely pointless?
Your free market approach works whe talking about butchers and bakers and candlestick makers.
It doesn’t work out so well when oligarchs finance madmen and do anything they want for a few pennies.
@shavixmir saidYou will not burn petroleum fuel if it is too expensive. How will it run out if nobody is burning it?
Like dodos.
@wajoma saidThe term "wasteful green energy" is not only propaganda, it's also oxymoronic. The entire point of "green" energy is reduce waste:
Privatise the whole thing, stop subsidizing fickle wasteful green energy, let those that want to dig for oil, dig for oil.
https://tinyurl.com/EPA-Waste
The average passenger vehicle emits 4 metric tons of carbon dioxide each year. That's not only wasteful,, it's harmful.
Think about why you attack green energy. Is it because your Republican leaders do? Is it because something you saw on Fox News? I'm asking you this seriously: why would a Republican president accuse windmills of causing cancer?
It should be painfully obvious. As long as oil makes people rich, those people will do anything to destroy competition, like green energy. You already know Republicans favor the rich; therefor conservatives get inundated with anti-green misinformation. This is the reason for Republican backlash against the Green New Deal.
Think about your first sentence: you simultaneously promote fossil fuels while attacking clean energy alternatives. Think about why you do that, and why you have such a strong emotional reaction against a movement that aims the better the health of the planet, which in turns creates a better future for humanity.
@vivify saidWajoma has shown many times that he is simply unable to grasp the concept that economic interactions between private individuals might cause undesirable impacts on other individuals i.e. what economists call "negative externalities".
The term "wasteful green energy" is not only propaganda, it's also oxymoronic. The entire point of "green" energy is reduce waste:
https://tinyurl.com/EPA-Waste
The average passenger vehicle emits 4 metric tons of carbon dioxide each year. That's not only wasteful,, it's harmful.
Think about why you attack green energy. Is it because your Republican leaders do? ...[text shortened]... that aims the better the health of the planet, which in turns creates a better future for humanity.
It seems unlikely he ever will.
@mott-the-hoople saidWhat you DON'T know about green energy would fill many volumes - but please, exercise your right and privilege to put your ignorance on display. 🙄
a compromised president…refusing to US oil under the pretext of green energy
“ While the administration touts “clean” alternatives, enhanced reliance on Russian and Iranian oil imports will only serve to raise global methane emissions, the most potent greenhouse gas.
According to the International Energy Agency’s global methane tracker, Russia was the world’s ...[text shortened]... .com/2022/03/05/russian-oil-and-gas-operations-emit-30-percent-more-methane-than-american-producers/
@mott-the-hoople saidWhat's the point of energy independence if the government can't pay its bills?
a compromised president…refusing to US oil under the pretext of green energy
“ While the administration touts “clean” alternatives, enhanced reliance on Russian and Iranian oil imports will only serve to raise global methane emissions, the most potent greenhouse gas.
According to the International Energy Agency’s global methane tracker, Russia was the world’s ...[text shortened]... .com/2022/03/05/russian-oil-and-gas-operations-emit-30-percent-more-methane-than-american-producers/
$8 trillion in debt accumulation in 4 years. That's insane-o.
@vivify saidvivify: Is it because your Republican leaders do?
The term "wasteful green energy" is not only propaganda, it's also oxymoronic. The entire point of "green" energy is reduce waste:
https://tinyurl.com/EPA-Waste
The average passenger vehicle emits 4 metric tons of carbon dioxide each year. That's not only wasteful,, it's harmful.
Think about why you attack green energy. Is it because your Republican leaders do? ...[text shortened]... that aims the better the health of the planet, which in turns creates a better future for humanity.
When the martian points his ray gun at me and says 'Take me to your leader' I'm going to put my thumb on my chest and say 'You're talking to him bud.' Not a republican, not an American, don't care for the republicans or dimocrats.
vivify: I'm asking you this seriously: why would a Republican president accuse windmills of causing cancer?
Don't care, don't know what you're talking about, GTFO with your snakey diversion techniques.
Currently involved in erecting wind towers so very aware of what goes into producing, shipping, transporting to site, erection, and no doubt in the near future decommissioning of these wasteful fickle eyesores. If they're viable let the free market decide, we all know they'd be abandoned tomorrow if not subsidised by goobermint with all the 'jobs' for the boys' connections that go with goobermint infrastructure jobs.
I don't care who gets rich as long as there are is no force, threats of force and fraud involved as per the drug compnaies in the last 2 years.
@wajoma [i]said[/iSo you're not an American conservative. Your points are still exactly the same as one.
If they're viable let the free market decide, we all know they'd be abandoned tomorrow if not subsidised by goobermint with all the 'jobs' for the boys' connections that go with goobermint infrastructure jobs.
I don't care who gets rich as long as there are is no force, threats of force and fraud involved as per the drug compnaies in the last 2 years.
The "free market" is not how anything should be decided; not least of all, because "free markets" are a myth. It's no secret those with money and power bury competition; that's why monopoly laws are needed.
"Free markets" are the reason eight million people each year die from tobacco use. "Free markets" are also why the planet is being wrecked and millions more will die from climate-change related disasters.