Economy EPA cut regulations BIGLY

Stoic1 said:
I think people are starting to wake up that many of the "environmentalists" are misguided and often not looking at the larger spectrum of unintended consequences. Instead they are virtue signaling.

There is an untold number of examples, but I gave one in this thread about early starter wear and the larger carbon footprint from do-gooders who cant see the forest through the trees.

I'm reminded of this scene from landman where Billy Bob talk about the unseen negative impact of wind generators.



Now don't get me wrong. I live a pretty light carbon footprint lifestyle. In fact I'd go so far as to call myself an environmentalist. Moreso than at least 95% of the people on this board. Im all for clean energy, cleaning the oceans, recycling. I live that lifestyle.

But people thinking that these environmentally friendly policies have no goddamn idea the impact they have. "I drive an EV!", well fuckin-A, Linda that's awesome. Here's a picture of child slave labor in the lithium mines needed to fund that yoga class talking point:

Getty-Images-1244417797.jpg


The cleanest fucking energy we can make is nuclear and we have made exactly 2 plants in the last 30 years.

So the agency actively hampering our best efforts is now being championed by misguided virtue signaling hypocrits? Excuse me.

<{nope}>
Click to expand...


I loved season one of Landman but there were a couple of scenes I called out as bullshit, including that one.

This video links to studies of the numbers the show used





Here's Rogan using his enormous platform to be a ghoul about that message, and Billy Bob telling him how much oil men loved it (surprise surprise).

 
Zookeeper Gabe said:
Going straight for epic levels of dumb, while we are at it let’s roll back PFAS levels. Lead is also back in fashion.
Click to expand...
These politicians are actually completely sinister. They publicly talk about and push the idea that climate change is fake. Meanwhile, they’re making plans for how to position the US to take advantage of the new world that climate change is about to make. That stuff about the US wanting Greenland? Directly connected to climate change predictions.

It’s not just the US either. Right now the US, China and Russia are all jockeying for position to be best able to take advantage of new sea trade routes as the ice caps recede. If climate change was fake, these powers wouldn’t be building their military strategy around it.
 
chardog said:
Surprised no thread on this


129 rolled back regs

no windmills
should see a savings of $2.4K a vehicle
no forced mandate on EV's
no start stop regs needed (a disastrous system)
congress needs to pass it if they want it

recap by zeldon, whatever car you want, buy it, whether it's EV, Hybrid, Diesel or Gas (no implied favoritism)
Click to expand...

he is fucking over tesla so badly
 
Stoic1 said:
I think people are starting to wake up that many of the "environmentalists" are misguided and often not looking at the larger spectrum of unintended consequences. Instead they are virtue signaling.

There is an untold number of examples, but I gave one in this thread about early starter wear and the larger carbon footprint from do-gooders who cant see the forest through the trees.

I'm reminded of this scene from landman where Billy Bob talk about the unseen negative impact of wind generators.



Now don't get me wrong. I live a pretty light carbon footprint lifestyle. In fact I'd go so far as to call myself an environmentalist. Moreso than at least 95% of the people on this board. Im all for clean energy, cleaning the oceans, recycling. I live that lifestyle.

But people thinking that these environmentally friendly policies have no goddamn idea the impact they have. "I drive an EV!", well fuckin-A, Linda that's awesome. Here's a picture of child slave labor in the lithium mines needed to fund that yoga class talking point:

Getty-Images-1244417797.jpg


The cleanest fucking energy we can make is nuclear and we have made exactly 2 plants in the last 30 years.

So the agency actively hampering our best efforts is now being championed by misguided virtue signaling hypocrits? Excuse me.

<{nope}>
Click to expand...


That's not a lithium mine. Probably a cobalt mine.

And I'm sure big oil didn't have any part in that show whatsover.
 
taking my environmental policy from a show written by Taylor Sheridan >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
 
jefferz said:
That's not a lithium mine. Probably a cobalt mine.

And I'm sure big oil didn't have any part in that show whatsover.
Click to expand...
You don't know much about lithium battery technology do you?
 

Was Climate Change the Greatest Financial Scandal in History?​


townhall.com

Was Climate Change the Greatest Financial Scandal in History?

An analysis of the $16 trillion spent on climate change and its opportunity costs on global welfare.
townhall.com townhall.com

Since the global warming crusade started some 30 years ago, the temperature of the planet has not been altered by one-tenth of a degree – as even the alarmists will admit.

In other words, $16 trillion has been spent – a lot of people got very, very rich off the government largesse – but there is not a penny of measurable payoff.

But it's much worse than that. In economics there is a concept called opportunity cost: What could we have done with $16 trillion to make the world better off?

What if the $16 trillion had been spent on clean water for poor countries? Preventing avoidable deaths from diseases like malaria? Building schools in African villages to end illiteracy? Bringing reliable and affordable electric power to the more than 1 billion people who still lack access? Curing cancer?


Many millions of lives could have been saved.

We could have lifted millions more out of poverty. The benefits of speeding up the race for the cure for cancer could have added tens of millions of additional years of life at an economic value in the tens of trillions of dollars.

Instead, we effectively poured $16 trillion down the drain. For this reason, it is important that we identify the green "climate change" derangement syndrome as perhaps the most inhumane political movement in history.

The people at the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund and the United Nations, and politicians like Al Gore, Joe Biden and John Kerry who voted for and carried out this Green New Deal scam, should be placed on a wall of shame. Biden's administration alone wasted $400 billion on green energy and other sham climate change programs.

The one sliver of good news is that it appears the climate change neuroses have finally started to subside. We've reached peak global warming craziness in the U.S., for sure, and even Europe seems to have turned its back on its economically masochistic net zero fossil fuels obsession.

Donald Trump is wisely and rapidly dismantling the climate change industrial complex. Of all his pro-growth economic policies, there may be none with a higher longtime payoff than his recent order to repeal the mother of all costly regulations: the anti-fossil fuels "endangerment rule" taxing carbon dioxide emissions. The cost of that regulation had been estimated to exceed $1 trillion over time.

We can't recapture the $16 trillion wasted on a false crisis. Sunk costs are, alas, sunk. But we can stop the madness of actually believing that politicians who can't even pay off the balance on their credit cards can somehow change the world's temperature.
 
AWilder said:
he is fucking over tesla so badly
Click to expand...
short term loss, long term gain, legacy automakers are falling behind, Ford, GM, Stellantis cutting back on EV's, and despite slowing in sales, Tesla is GAINING market share within the EV market, the gap is widening.
 
Beechwood said:

Was Climate Change the Greatest Financial Scandal in History?​


townhall.com

Was Climate Change the Greatest Financial Scandal in History?

An analysis of the $16 trillion spent on climate change and its opportunity costs on global welfare.
townhall.com townhall.com

Since the global warming crusade started some 30 years ago, the temperature of the planet has not been altered by one-tenth of a degree – as even the alarmists will admit.

In other words, $16 trillion has been spent – a lot of people got very, very rich off the government largesse – but there is not a penny of measurable payoff.

But it's much worse than that. In economics there is a concept called opportunity cost: What could we have done with $16 trillion to make the world better off?

What if the $16 trillion had been spent on clean water for poor countries? Preventing avoidable deaths from diseases like malaria? Building schools in African villages to end illiteracy? Bringing reliable and affordable electric power to the more than 1 billion people who still lack access? Curing cancer?


Many millions of lives could have been saved.

We could have lifted millions more out of poverty. The benefits of speeding up the race for the cure for cancer could have added tens of millions of additional years of life at an economic value in the tens of trillions of dollars.

Instead, we effectively poured $16 trillion down the drain. For this reason, it is important that we identify the green "climate change" derangement syndrome as perhaps the most inhumane political movement in history.

The people at the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund and the United Nations, and politicians like Al Gore, Joe Biden and John Kerry who voted for and carried out this Green New Deal scam, should be placed on a wall of shame. Biden's administration alone wasted $400 billion on green energy and other sham climate change programs.

The one sliver of good news is that it appears the climate change neuroses have finally started to subside. We've reached peak global warming craziness in the U.S., for sure, and even Europe seems to have turned its back on its economically masochistic net zero fossil fuels obsession.

Donald Trump is wisely and rapidly dismantling the climate change industrial complex. Of all his pro-growth economic policies, there may be none with a higher longtime payoff than his recent order to repeal the mother of all costly regulations: the anti-fossil fuels "endangerment rule" taxing carbon dioxide emissions. The cost of that regulation had been estimated to exceed $1 trillion over time.

We can't recapture the $16 trillion wasted on a false crisis. Sunk costs are, alas, sunk. But we can stop the madness of actually believing that politicians who can't even pay off the balance on their credit cards can somehow change the world's temperature.
Click to expand...
I like the number of citations in that economist's opinion piece on global climate change. I usually prefer to get my info from people not involved in the topic. The temperature hasn't changed by even one tenth of one degree since 1990? Pretty sure that's straight up false.
 
chardog said:
short term loss, long term gain, legacy automakers are falling behind, Ford, GM, Stellantis cutting back on EV's, and despite slowing in sales, Tesla is GAINING market share within the EV market, the gap is widening.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting these numbers? I literally just read an article about the ev market growing and Tesla shrinking.
 
GrantB13 said:
I like the number of citations in that economist's opinion piece on global climate change. I usually prefer to get my info from people not involved in the topic. The temperature hasn't changed by even one tenth of one degree since 1990? Pretty sure that's straight up false.
Click to expand...

Generally speaking, if an article's title is a question, then the answer is no, and the article isn't worth reading.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,282,642
Messages
58,452,323
Members
176,041
Latest member
jaybuff

Share this page

Back
Top