brenthutch

Wow! There is a lot of hate out there. I don’t recall the righties on this forum dancing on the grave of RBG, even though her replacement by a Constitutional Originalist was much more impactful to people’s real lives than a talking head on AM radio who’s shoes are already filled by his progeny. (More than we can say about RBG). Lots and lots of hate

Hi Jerry, What did we get from the $1.2 billion the Bush administration spent on hydrogen? What did we get for the billions the Obama administration spent on Fisker, Solindra, and others? Where is my geothermal electricity? Why does “the worlds largest thermal solar power station” dump more than 50,000 tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year? Seems like we got a lot more for our money back in the ‘50s. Let’s let venture capital do the dice rolling with their money, the government should stick to the basics.

I agree about innovation. When I made my first jump in Airborne School (coming up on 40 years ago) we were still using the “dial-a-death” harnesses in tower week. I jumped T10s, -1Bs, and finally-1Cs. 28 years ago my first civilian jumps were static line, my first skydives were with rip-cords, F111 mains and round reserves. I witnessed an explosion of innovation for about ten years, but then things slowed down. Twenty years ago I was jumping a 98sqf zero p cross braced spectra lined rocket ship not much different than today’s offerings. I have not seen the same pace of development in the last twenty years as I did in my first 10. As technology matures the pace development slows as evidenced by the iPhone’s battery storage improvements. I have no problem with people investing their money in new technology, that is what venture capital is for. I have a big problem when the government does it with my money. We gave Fisker millions, they went bankrupt and some of the money wound up in the pockets of Joe Biden’s sons. Biden’s climate plan and EV boondoggle feels like 2012 all over again.

No renewables drive up energy costs, take a look at Germany. They aggressively pursued renewables only to have the highest electricity prices in the EU.

I don’t know if you remember, but we started having these conversations about 30 years ago. Since then trillions of dollars have been spent on renewables and EVs. What do we have to show for it? We still get about the same percentage of energy from fossil fuels as we did a century ago, electric cars are still a subsidized, niche product for the upper middle class and CO2 levels have continued to rise unabated. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjrqYHol_HuAhUqGFkFHX5uCcMQFjADegQIAhAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.forbes.com%2Fsites%2Frrapier%2F2020%2F06%2F20%2Fbp-review-new-highs-in-global-energy-consumption-and-carbon-emissions-in-2019%2F&usg=AOvVaw3IvlsFaCHtWsy3NTT9IPjs https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiyoYP3l_HuAhW3FFkFHUKuBJIQFjABegQICxAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.iea.org%2Freports%2Fglobal-ev-outlook-2020&usg=AOvVaw2lH-SQeTRK9w5mBjHedNfv https://www.co2.earth/daily-co2 Now I ask you, just who is grounded in reality and who is riding their unicorn through rainbow colored clouds of wishful thinking?

The C-8 Corvette is purported to have two hybrids in development. One with a 6.2L 495hp V8 and another with a 5.5L flat plane twin turbo 700+hp, to go with a 150hp electric motor

It says electric or hybrid, my GLS450 is a hybrid. (Yes I know the article said plug-in) BTW Western Europe accounts for just over 10% of global car sales, so a 100% electric Europe won’t have much of an impact. Not to mention the typical lifespan of an internal combustion engine car is more than ten years. So barring a government cram-down, most of the cars in the world will still be using gasoline for the foreseeable future.

The emotion and ego belongs to the Tesla “fan boys” and if “sooner than expected” is long after we are dead, you might have a point. With less than three percent of global car sales, they have a way to go.

If TX had a solar panel on every roof, a battery in every garage, replaced every oil derrick with a wind turbine, and had a Tesla in every driveway, they would be freezing to death by the thousands.

“Fire hazard: German town bans e-cars from parking garage The fire risks posed by electric cars are well known, so much so that the Bavarian town of Kulmbach has just banned electric and hybrid vehicles from parking inside parking garages because their batteries are so difficult to extinguish when fire starts. According to German online weekly FOCUS here, “This was decided by the city in consultation with the fire brigade for the underground car park under Eku-Platz, as first reported by the portal InFranken.de.” Battery fires “dramatic”, too difficult to extinguish In the event of an electric or hybrid vehicle battery fire, extinguishing it would take too long and the heat generated could lead to extensive structural damage to the parking garage. FOCUS reports: “A steel floor can withstand heat for a certain time, but if too much heat is applied, the concrete will burst and the iron will melt. Then there would be a danger of collapse.“

They had better drop a lot if they have to be replaced every several years.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/parenting/ct-life-student-wellness-remote-learning-online-school-20201023-g3tjimt5rjfp3hs2cntoc7jlsq-story.html “The most recent prompt in Freeman’s classroom culture day was: “How are you adjusting to remote learning?” “The responses that I got were absolutely heartbreaking,” said Freeman. “That was when I learned that my students are struggling.” Her high school students reported battles with depression, anxiety and myriad physical ailments from sitting in front of a computer screen all day, like joint pain, headaches and vision impairment.” Home schooling is not the same as remote learning.

Way too cold up here, not getting any of that global warming. And it is California NOT Florida that is the COVID death capital of the United States.

https://www.capecodtimes.com/story/news/2020/12/14/remote-learning-takes-toll-students-mental-health/6543209002/ “emergency visits and hospital stays for children who thought about or tried to die by suicide have doubled, according to the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics” You haven’t looked

Yet more evidence: https://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/lockdowns-could-kill-more-people-than-covid-19/ and more https://www.aier.org/article/lockdowns-do-not-control-the-coronavirus-the-evidence/

No lockdowns are very effective......at destroying the economy, ruining children’s education, creating a mental health crisis, exasperating a homeless crisis, destroying small businesses, and draining savings accounts to name a few. It just doesn’t look like they save a bunch of lives.

% of population > 65 years old = 19.1% for FL and 14.8% for CA https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/07/09/where-do-the-oldest-americans-live/

That is more a result in the difference in the age of the population than any policy difference. Fl 41.8 years old CA 36.1 years old

California unemployment rate 9% Florida unemployment rate 6.1%

I would say it’s a tie. The real winners are the citizens and businesses of Florida. As a reward to Florida my family and I will be pumping thousands of dollars into their economy via amusement parks, restaurants and bars next month.

https://nypost.com/2021/02/15/florida-california-see-covid-19-declines-despite-different-approaches/ “But despite the two states’ varying approaches this winter, they have yielded similar results....California is currently leading the nation in the total number of cases, but it has nearly twice the number of residents of Florida. When the cases are adjusted for population, their tally is about the same. California has recorded about 8,822 cases per 100,000 people, while Florida has about 8,508 for the same population, data shows.“ Well well well, would you look at that.

Dated 2009, that hypothesis has since been falsified. “predictions of a more negative Arctic Oscillation, wavier jet stream, colder winters in mid-latitudes or, more specifically, in Eurasia, and more frequent and/or widespread cold extremes have not become reality (Fig. 1). The short-term tendencies from the late 1980s through to early 2010s that fuelled the initial speculation of Arctic influence have not continued over the past decade” “It is indefensible to continue to rely on past short-term trends, which have since disappeared, as evidence of a large influence of Arctic warming on mid-latitude winter climate and extreme weather”

The Nature study concluded the “its cold because its hot” theory should no longer be used to explain deadly cold spells. I say, the current cold-snap is evidence of winter, and a cold one, covering the entire hemisphere. We were assured by a leading climate science that, by now, snow would be a rare event. He could not have been more wrong.

Not what you think ”predictions of a more negative Arctic Oscillation, wavier jet stream, colder winters in mid-latitudes or, more specifically, in Eurasia, and more frequent and/or widespread cold extremes have not become reality (Fig. 1). The short-term tendencies from the late 1980s through to early 2010s that fuelled the initial speculation of Arctic influence have not continued over the past decade” “It is indefensible to continue to rely on past short-term trends, which have since disappeared, as evidence of a large influence of Arctic warming on mid-latitude winter climate and extreme weather” https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-00954-y

Sounds like the same folks predicting renewables will replace fossil fuels before we land a human on Mars.