Naomi hates you all

[Coreece 190]

28 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

But I'm tired of the non stop talk about this thing.

I know, right?  The mother in law calls like 3 times a day talking about it along with all her other nonsense, gossip and two-faced shit talk.

Mother in law -  "blah, blah, blah, are you worried, are you worried?" 

Wife - "Um, no, not particularly."

Mother in law - "well you should be, it's coming to Michigan."

 

I guess I should be happy that I'm not the one that has to talk to her about it - woman would drive me nuts. . .but I still love her.

 

33 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

(corona virus) is not a proper noun.

That is weird wild stuff - I did not know that.  Thanks!

[gowlerk 2,274]

46 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

It (corona virus) is not a proper noun.

More research tells me that the correct term is one word.      coronavirus

[brenthutch 444]

21 hours ago, billvon said:

The problem with the slow rollout of solar or EV's?  The problem converting the grid over to renewables?  The problem matching generation to load?   Or are you thinking of more general issues?

The problem with the slow rollout of solar and EV,s is because there is no demand for them.  The same with renewables.  Not enough people share your fantasy of powering the world with rainbows and unicorn farts to make it a reality.

[gowlerk 2,274]

10 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The problem with the slow rollout of solar and EV,s is because there is no demand for them.  The same with renewables.  Not enough people share your fantasy of powering the world with rainbows and unicorn farts to make it a reality.

You are either not paying attention or you are willfully blind to the huge investments that capitalists are making in both EVs and renewable energy.

[brenthutch 444]

8 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

You are either not paying attention or you are willfully blind to the huge investments that capitalists are making in both EVs and renewable energy.

Not nearly as much as they are making in combustion engine vehicles and fossil fuels. If you don't understand this simple fact you must not be paying attention or you are willfully blind. 

Edited March 9, 2020 by brenthutch

[gowlerk 2,274]

8 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Not nearly as much as they are making in combustion engine vehicles and fossil fuels. If you don't understand this simple fact you must not be paying attention or you are willfully blind. 

Keep looking in that rear view mirror.

[brenthutch 444]

Just now, gowlerk said:

Keep looking in that rear view mirror.

Are you claiming that capitalists are making more investments in EVs and renewables then they are in internal combustion engines and fossil fuels?   

[gowlerk 2,274]

7 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Are you claiming that capitalists are making more investments in EVs and renewables then they are in internal combustion engines and fossil fuels?   

I'm claiming that the trend is toward larger investments in newer technologies. Good old gas still dominates, but EVs have potential advantages that the likes of GM and Ford are rushing to exploit. Yes, they are still spending to squeeze more efficiencies out of piston engines, but that is a mature technology. The new investment is going into where they know they will need to be in the future. They sure as hell don't want to be leaving it to Elon.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/windsor/gm-shows-electric-vehicles-tesla-run-1.5486516

Edited March 9, 2020 by gowlerk

[brenthutch 444]

So you concede that the largest investments are in piston engines, and traditional energy sources.  That is exactly what I was saying.

[billvon 3,111]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

The problem with the slow rollout of solar and EV,s is because there is no demand for them. 

US sales of EV's:

2010 345
2011 17735
2012 52,835
2013 96,702
2014 123,347
2015 114,022
2016 157,112
2017 194,479
2018 361,307

Quote

The same with renewables. 

Worldwide installed solar capacity in megawatts:

2001    1,615    
2002    2,069        
2003    2,635        
2004    3,723    
2005    5,112    
2006    6,660    
2007    9,183    
2008    15,844    
2009    23,185    
2010    40,336    
2011    70,469    
2012    100,504    
2013    138,856    
2014    178,391    
2015    229,300    
2016    302,300    
2017    405,000    
2018    480,300    

Quote

Not enough people share your fantasy of powering the world with rainbows and unicorn farts to make it a reality.

480 gigawatts of reality is out there right now, and is growing faster every year.   I am sure it is driving your blood pressure through the roof.

[billvon 3,111]

31 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Not nearly as much as they are making in combustion engine vehicles and fossil fuels.

They are making huge investments in them - and those investments are declining year over year.  Just as they are making huge investments in EV's - and those investments are climbing year over year.

But hang onto that horse buggy stock.  I am sure that's the wave of the future.

[brenthutch 444]

33 minutes ago, billvon said:

US sales of EV's:

2010 345
2011 17735
2012 52,835
2013 96,702
2014 123,347
2015 114,022
2016 157,112
2017 194,479
2018 361,307

Worldwide installed solar capacity in megawatts:

2001    1,615    
2002    2,069        
2003    2,635        
2004    3,723    
2005    5,112    
2006    6,660    
2007    9,183    
2008    15,844    
2009    23,185    
2010    40,336    
2011    70,469    
2012    100,504    
2013    138,856    
2014    178,391    
2015    229,300    
2016    302,300    
2017    405,000    
2018    480,300    

480 gigawatts of reality is out there right now, and is growing faster every year.   I am sure it is driving your blood pressure through the roof.

Aren't you cute.  You are talking megawatts, while the fossil fuel industry is measured in terawatts.  480,300 EVs?  LOL there were twice as many full sized pickup trucks sold last year.  Yes, I will concede that renewables are growing, just not as fast as fossil fuels are growing.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/09/global-renewable-energy-investment-slowing-down-worry/

Edited March 9, 2020 by brenthutch

[gowlerk 2,274]

34 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

So you concede that the largest investments are in piston engines, and traditional energy sources.  That is exactly what I was saying.

No, I do not concede that. I do concede that petro fuel engines are still the dominate types being produced. But this is pointless, we all know that. My point is that the people who run these companies have said that they see EVs becoming dominate in the future. I could go with your beliefs, or I could go with Mary Barra........

[brenthutch 444]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

No, I do not concede that. I do concede that petro fuel engines are still the dominate types being produced. But this is pointless, we all know that. My point is that the people who run these companies have said that they see EVs becoming dominate in the future. I could go with your beliefs, or I could go with Mary Barra........

EVs are the vehicles of the future,...……...and always will be. 

[gowlerk 2,274]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

EVs are the vehicles of the future,...……...and always will be. 

The people with the money still disagree with you.

[airdvr 210]

59 minutes ago, billvon said:

They are making huge investments in them - and those investments are declining year over year.  Just as they are making huge investments in EV's - and those investments are climbing year over year.

But hang onto that horse buggy stock.  I am sure that's the wave of the future.

The only reason car companies are making investment in anything is the potential to make a buck.  I can assure they aren't doing it to save the planet.

[gowlerk 2,274]

24 minutes ago, airdvr said:

The only reason car companies are making investment in anything is the potential to make a buck.  I can assure they aren't doing it to save the planet.

Correct 

[billvon 3,111]

Just now, airdvr said:

The only reason car companies are making investment in anything is the potential to make a buck.  I can assure they aren't doing it to save the planet.

They are doing both.  They want to make a buck.  They do that by selling to people who want to save the planet.  And there are a lot of them; in a recent survey 66% of people out there were willing to pay more for environmental benefits.

[brenthutch 444]

CO2 is an environmental benefit (shrinking deserts, increased food production and a literal greening of the planet).  When you break out "climate change" into its own category, it doesn't even make the top ten of peoples concerns. 

 

[airdvr 210]

8 hours ago, billvon said:

 in a recent survey 66% of people out there were willing to pay more for environmental benefits.

Why do you hate poor people?

[billvon 3,111]

4 hours ago, airdvr said:

Why do you hate poor people?

You must have missed the "willing" part up there.

Freedom.  It's a tough concept.

[turtlespeed 226]

18 hours ago, billvon said:

20 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

Its all the same emergency.

No, it's not.  There will be an increase in sea level, for example.  That will cause more frequent flooding.  Flooding is different from a wildfire.  (Trust me on this; I've experienced both.)

To use the aircraft analogy again, having a drunk pilot is different than a canopy over the tail, and that's different from an engine out.  (And an engine out during rotation is very different than an engine out at 3000 feet.)  All different things that require different responses, even if to a non-pilot they are "all the same emergency" because they have to do with an airplane.

Quote

Why is there more of an urgency about the Corona Virus? 

I don't know why you think it's more urgent.  As diseases go, you are far more likely to die of something else.  But if you want to feel that it's super urgent, and want to talk about it 24/7, be my guest.  The media agrees with you so you'd be in good company.

 

OK - so you and I agree that the reactions for climate change and the extreme alarmism isn't proper, or warranted, for that type of emergency that climate change, in general, presents.

 

[SkyDekker 1,465]

16 hours ago, brenthutch said:

EVs are the vehicles of the future,...……...and always will be. 

 

CEO of Porsche seems to think so

[airdvr 210]

1 minute ago, SkyDekker said:

 

CEO of Porsche seems to think so

I'd venture that's a case of "telling them what they want to hear".  I guess we'll see over the next decade.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

2 minutes ago, airdvr said:

I'd venture that's a case of "telling them what they want to hear".  I guess we'll see over the next decade.

You generally have to keep your board and your investors happy when you are a CEO.