Climate change could mean the extinction of our species

[Paladin]

Maybe you can also get some whale skin hubcaps and throw your styrofoam containers out the window.

Was this post your admission?

Do you walk or pedal a bicycle EVERYWHERE you go?

Never heard of a whaleskin hubcap, that was a rather poor attempt at a nonexistent analogy, and I don't like Styrofoam anything.

I recycle as much as I can here. I just don't need you or any overblown hollwyood asshole to tell me that I'm polluting the planet while they are riding around every their privates jets take them to.

[filghy2]

Never heard of a whaleskin hubcap, that was a rather poor attempt at a nonexistent analogy, and I don't like Styrofoam anything.

It was a hit song from the 1990s, though maybe the satire is lost on you. This is the relevant section.

You know what I'm gonna do?
I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
Hot pink, with whale skin hubcaps
And all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for head lights (yeah)
And I'm gonna drive in that baby at 115 miles per hour
Gettin' 1 mile per gallon
Sucking down Quarter Pounder cheeseburgers from McDonald's
In the old fashioned non-biodegradable styrofoam containers
And when I'm done sucking down those greaseball burgers
I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag
And then I'm gonna toss the Styrofoam containers right out the side
And there ain't a goddamn thing anybody can do about it, you know why?
Because we've got the bomb, that's why
Two words, nuclear fucking weapons, OK?
Russia, Germany, Romania, they can have all the democracy they want
They can have a big democracy cakewalk
Right through the middle of Tiananmen Square
And it won't make a lick of difference
Because we've got the bombs, OK?
https://genius.com/Denis-leary-asshole-lyrics

[filghy2]

Do you walk or pedal a bicycle EVERYWHERE you go?

I do my bit. I walk, cycle or take public transport if it's feasible. I only have one small car and I drive less than 3000 km per year.

As usual, you miss the point anyway. Nobody is seriously suggesting we have to go to net zero right now. The aim is to do so over the next 15 years or so. Nobody is saying we have to return to some pre-industrial existence. The technology to transition away from fossil fuels exists and it is getting better and cheaper all the time.

[Paladin]

It was a hit song from the 1990s, though maybe the satire is lost on you. This is the relevant section.

You know what I'm gonna do?
I'm gonna get myself a 1967 Cadillac Eldorado convertible
Hot pink, with whale skin hubcaps
And all leather cow interior
And big brown baby seal eyes for head lights (yeah)
And I'm gonna drive in that baby at 115 miles per hour
Gettin' 1 mile per gallon
Sucking down Quarter Pounder cheeseburgers from McDonald's
In the old fashioned non-biodegradable styrofoam containers
And when I'm done sucking down those greaseball burgers
I'm gonna wipe my mouth with the American flag
And then I'm gonna toss the Styrofoam containers right out the side
And there ain't a goddamn thing anybody can do about it, you know why?
Because we've got the bomb, that's why
Two words, nuclear fucking weapons, OK?
Russia, Germany, Romania, they can have all the democracy they want
They can have a big democracy cakewalk
Right through the middle of Tiananmen Square
And it won't make a lick of difference
Because we've got the bombs, OK?
https://genius.com/Denis-leary-asshole-lyrics

Never heard of it. but he's ignorant. He's also a dumass because there were at least 8 countries with the bomb back then including russia.

Even the worst mileage Cadilacs back in the day got over 10MPG. My DVC gets 8-12 MPG, on par with current behemoth Suburban Uhttack Vehicles.
There was no such model as a 1967 ElDorado Convertible

[filghy2]

Never heard of it. but he's ignorant. He's also a dumass because there were at least 8 countries with the bomb back then including russia.

Even the worst mileage Cadilacs back in the day got over 10MPG. My DVC gets 8-12 MPG, on par with current behemoth Suburban Uhttack Vehicles.
There was no such model as a 1967 ElDorado Convertible

You don't know the meaning of this word, apparently
"Satire: the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues"

[Paladin]

You don't know the meaning of this word, apparently
"Satire: the use of humour, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues"

Attempting to call someone an asshole is not satire...

[filghy2]

Well, first, he wants to bring back US oil independence (by oil I also mean natural gas as appropriate) and extend it to oil dominance. This will have several effects:

It will lower the global price of oil, which will weaken petrol-chemical dependent countries like iran and russia.
It will lower the price of fuels here dramatically. This will have the further effect of lowering the transportation component of all goods and services sold here, and thus actually help LOWER prices for goods of all types here, because even if inflation goes to zero, that does not mean prices will drop.

Second he wants to lessen the regulatory burden here, which is the opposite of the feckless, foppish dolt has done for the past 4 years. It's actually needed for the above to take full effect. And no I do NOT mean pollute the hell out of the US. Our energy production is among the cleanest in the world.

Here's some data on pollution from different energy sources, both greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollution. It shows that oil is clearly the second most polluting energy source after coal, and way more polluting than the other sources.
https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy

How exactly can a big expansion in oil production not be bad for the environment? I'm pretty sure it's not going to cause coal-fired power stations to be closed down.

[filghy2]

PS: the major concern about fossil fuels is the pollution produced in their consumption, not in their production. Focussing only on the latter is obviously a red herring to divert attention from the main issue. No matter how 'clean' the production process might be, oil is still going to be polluting when the fuel is used for transport, etc.

Here's some data on carbon intensity per $ of GDP by country. The US is 49th worst out of 164 countries, which doesn't seem consistent with the claim that it is among the cleanest in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...tensity_of_GDP

[Ben]

[MrFanti]

China HUMILIATES US With Record-Breaking High Speed Rail | The Kyle Kulinski Show[/URL]

And on the other side of China....
China is building six times more new coal plants than other countries, report finds
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/02/11604...ies-report-fin