brenthutch

Well according to the Paris agreement, its full implementation would result in an unmeasurable impact on climate.....so I don't see how that is relevant.

that is what ryoder said.

You got me there, I am in full agreement that we will start to have a problem when global CO2 levels exceed 20,000 ppm. Just let me know the scenario where that might happen and I will be on board with whatever scheme you come up with to prevent it.

Yep, I have two kids (10 and 6), 55 years old, lived in Europe 5+ years, been to 19 countries and have lived in, (not visited but lived in) 9 states, and have a post graduate education. With regard to changes in weather, YES I have seen the weather change, it is what weather does. Floods, droughts, hurricanes, tornados, wildfires, blizzards etc., we have seen it all in the past we are seeing it now and we will continue to see it in the future. In the past, bad weather was attributed to an angry god/gods or a witches curse, now we chalk it up to SUVs. With regard to climate, of course I believe in climate change, if not for climate change NY would be under a mile of ice, without climate change Great Brittan would still be a wine producing country, without climate change the Sahara would be a lush savanna. The only course of action proven to be effective against natural disasters and climate change, is economic development. Because fossil fuels have proven to be a critical component of economic development, they are a force for good.

Elon Musk calls them subsidies, I think he would know.

Then why do you need a tax subsidy? The only thing more selfish than someone who wants to keep their own money, is someone who wants to take someone else's.

Polution aside, what do you have to say about this? " Most electric-vehicle buyers are far wealthier than average Americans. A nationwide survey in 2017 found that 56% had household incomes of at least $100,000 and 17% had household incomes of at least $200,000. (In 2016, median household income for the US as a whole was less than $58,000.) So it’s fair to say the subsidies disproportionately benefit the wealthy at the expense of the poor, who cannot afford to buy even subsidized electric vehicles or live in their own homes to take advantage of residential chargers or solar panels. Not only that, the wires and charging stations needed to charge all those electric vehicles will be paid for by all ratepayers, further raising electric rates. And as more wealthy customers install solar panels to charge their electric vehicles, the costs to provide them back-up power will fall on those who cannot afford to do so." Sounds like they are talking about someone we all know.

By your logic, oxygen and water are also pollutants

"RMI further explains that “Lesser cherry-picked the pollutants that support his narrative (in this case, SO2, NOX, and PMs [particulate matter]) and ignored the pollutant (CO2) that contradicts his narrative" CO2 is NOT a pollutant. Consider your source to be debunked.

https://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2018/05/15/are-electric-cars-worse-for-the-environment-000660 at the expense of poor people.

Yes that one

Gota love the folks who anthropomorphize frozen water #savetheglaciers #eat-thebabies

What does "relative to 1981-2010" mean?

Not as alarming as:https://www.mrctv.org/blog/watch-twerking-traffic-order-fight-climate-change

Nothing exceeds like excess.

http://www.greaseman.org/sounds/johnnys/1/Good Ship Grease Single-man water skiing.mp3

As a twenty year veteran in the combat arms, I would like to think that it might have a little something to do with our soldiers, sailors airmen and marines. There is no other fighting force on the planet as effective as the US military. In fact the only fighting force that has been shown to be effective against the military of the United states, is itself. "Roughly 1,264,000 American soldiers have died in the nation's wars--620,000 in the Civil War and 644,000 in all other conflicts. It was only as recently as the Vietnam War that the amount of American deaths in foreign wars eclipsed the number who died in the Civil War."

Double post, sorry

You have no idea how correct you are. Upgrading two miles of north Atherton street has taken two different general contractors, more than twelve million dollars and three years and counting. https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwixnvborPzkAhXug-AKHUTyD40QjRx6BAgBEAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.centredaily.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Fcommunity%2Fstate-college%2Farticle216297995.html&psig=AOvVaw2HR111ol6aurqrzHCQwOLC&ust=1570063593934452

I was against the Afghanistan, war from the start. If we wanted to attack the country from where 9/11 was planned, we would have invaded Germany. As far as Iraq, the case for war was so week that I thought the administration had an ace in its sleeve and was holding back to protect sources and methods, I was wrong.

You would be right, the one Republican voted against the project the two Democrats voted for it.

Based on some wildly optimistic assumptions. Reminds me of Georgetown TX.

I don't want to stop it, I just don't want to waste taxpayer money subsidizing it. Just recently the borough of State College (where I live) approved a million dollar + expenditure for solar panels at the local jail. I would have rather seen that money spent on drug rehab programs and job training, I guess that makes me a monster.

Wow, I didn't know that. Well what is stopping us? Its cheaper, more reliable, safer, takes up less space and is better for the environment. If all of your claims are true, then simple economic forces would drive adaptation all by themselves we don't even need the government. BTW that has been my position all along. Lets all get on the Green Bus!!! OOPS, Sorry, I missed some zeros. Its actually 200,000,000. https://www.quora.com/How-many-solar-panels-would-be-needed-to-replace-a-nuclear-power-station

One nuclear power plant a day or 2,000,000+ solar panels or 3000 wind turbines per day. And that is the net increase, we still have to replace the thousands a day that will be at the end of their useful lifespan.