Slashdot Mirror
Natural Gas is Now Getting in the Way; US Carbon Emissions Increase by 3.4% (arstechnica.com)
AmiMoJo shares a report: "The US was already off track in meeting its Paris Agreement targets. The gap is even wider headed into 2019." That's the dire news from Rhodium Group, a research firm that released preliminary estimates of US carbon emissions in 2018. Though the Trump administration said it would exit the Paris Agreement in 2017, the US is still bound by the agreement to submit progress reports until 2020. But the administration has justified regulatory rollbacks since then, claiming that regulation from the US government is unnecessary because emissions were trending downward anyway. But it appears that emissions have increased 3.4 percent in 2018 across the US economy, the second-largest annual increase in 20 years, according to Rhodium Group's preliminary data. (2010, when the US started recovering from the recession, was the largest annual increase in the last two decades.)
This reversal of course -- the first increase in emissions in three years -- came from a few sources. Carbon emissions from the US electricity sector increased by 1.9 percent, largely because the installation of new natural gas plants has outpaced coal retirements. Cheap natural gas has been credited with killing coal, which is a dirtier fossil fuel in terms of emissions. But natural gas is a fossil fuel, too, and burning more natural gas than is needed to simply replace coal will result in more carbon emissions. But electricity wasn't the main culprit. Transportation was.
This reversal of course -- the first increase in emissions in three years -- came from a few sources. Carbon emissions from the US electricity sector increased by 1.9 percent, largely because the installation of new natural gas plants has outpaced coal retirements. Cheap natural gas has been credited with killing coal, which is a dirtier fossil fuel in terms of emissions. But natural gas is a fossil fuel, too, and burning more natural gas than is needed to simply replace coal will result in more carbon emissions. But electricity wasn't the main culprit. Transportation was.
Of course this never happens. But we still need to raise your taxes. For the good of the collective, comrade.
Corporatism != Free Market
Thank you Mr Trump.
Let's just say it is because Americans are greedy selfish individuals that think that if you can't drive an SUV/pickup, live in a McMansion, fly to extravagant locations, and eat beef every day, you aren't living the American Dream.
For many liberals, one can lie to oneself and say that technology needs to improve and we need more alternative energy.
For many conservatives, one can line to oneself and say that climate change isn't real.
It's not fashionable to actually own it and say that American lifestyle of endless consumerism isn't sustainable.
News at eleven
Why Are you surprised when a known coupling occurs ?
Stop eating so many cheese burgers and we won't need to have so many cows.
We're willing to make compromises, we assumed you wanted to have hot running water and cheese burgers. So something else has to go.
Liberals reap what they sow. Get rid of coal it's so dirty.. etc. etc.. But the outcome is more burning of natural gas to make up for coals loss.
Let's just say it is because Americans are selfish individuals that think that if you can't drive an SUV/pickup, live in a McMansion, fly to extravagant locations, and eat beef every day, you aren't living the American Dream.
For many liberals, one can lie to oneself and say that technology needs to improve and we need more alternative energy.
For many conservatives, one can line to oneself and say that climate change isn't real.
It's not fashionable to actually own it and say that American lifestyle of endless consumerism isn't sustainable.
I think that's the only way to really drop air pollution and carbon emissions. Even if solar and wind were cheaper long term the amount of infrastructure spending needed means no private firm is going to want to jump in.
It's like how even Microsoft can't compete with Quicken/Quickbooks because they've spend a fortune on small business accounting. You end up having to invest too much getting in the door and then you can't compete with established players because they've long since made back their investment and they're coasting on profits. That means as soon as a competitor shows up they'll just drop their pants and undercut you until you can't make your loan payments and you collapse. Nobody's gonna put up billions to take that risk when they can just buy stock in oil or gas and wait for shortages (short or long term) to make them rich...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Last time I checked, we're done with the Paris agreement in 2020 (specifically on Nov 4). By trying to slip it through as an executive thing (to skip Senate ratification as a binding approval), Obama allowed the next President (Trump) to kill it, and kill it he did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_withdrawal_from_the_Paris_Agreement
...due to natural gas...mostly methane. I upped my Taco Bell intake this year and have been ripping farts left and right.
But ... perpetual growth! It's mandatory for a healthy economy! Just look at all the Americans who try to participate, at least with their weight!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Climate change is more about redistributing money than about our planetary weather conditions. Paris was just another attempt to suck money out of the U.S. economy and move it to less developed countries. Breathe in, breathe out. I love the smell of good clean coal in the morning!
I drive an econo-box and rent my home. I've never flown to anywhere exotic, and I eat way more chicken than beef. I thought I was living the American dream, but now I feel so ashamed. Thank you for enlightening me.
"Growth" is another word for cancer.
"Consumption" is another word for TB.
As noted in TFS and TFA, much of the increase comes from the transportation sector, and increased demand for diesel (and jet fuel, but I repeat myself.) What's needed to make immediate improvements in transportation efficiency and emissions is electrified rail. The specifics of what that would look like vary from place to place, and situation to situation, but in general getting rid of rubber tires and adding electric motivation are things which we not only could be doing now, but could have been doing already.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I love Tony Heller for debunking this nonsense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e82smfcypUc
Go Fuck Yourself. boo hoo boo hoo America is ruining everything! you god damn fuckers cry. Well you do that till you need help or fuck your self up in some way. Then it's America come and save use from own stupidity!
Yeah, Go Fuck Yourself. God Bless President Trump for putting you fuckers in your place.
It's not fashionable to actually own it and say that American lifestyle of endless consumerism isn't sustainable.
It may be fashionable to believe what you see on TV is how most Americans live.
Fashionable? Maybe. Stupid? Certainly.
For example, I, a simple-minded American, am fully capable of believing that not all people from Holland wear wooden clogs and live in a windmill, not all people in Germany live in gingerbread houses in the Alps and wear lederhosen, and not all people in the UK wear tophats and monocles and live in a castle. No matter how fashionable those themes may be.
Even though emissions from passenger cars was down, emissions from planes and trucks are up. Hopefully the Tesla push to electrify trucking will come into reality on the market soon.
Well as long as we are pointing fingers lets make sure that we have plenty to point at. In 2018 China was up 4.7% and India by 6.3%. An according to this report, the US is only up by 2.5%. Interesting, both are well below even the 3.5% mark of the article. But yet, we leave those out and just post a US bashing article. The EU is doing good.
https://www.theguardian.com/en...
I read at +2. If your post doesn't reach that level I will not see or respond to it.
Cheap natural gas has been credited with killing coal, which is a dirtier fossil fuel in terms of emissions. But natural gas is a fossil fuel, too, and burning more natural gas than is needed to simply replace coal will result in more carbon emissions.
What stupidity. Nobody is burning more natural gas than is needed and nobody is running coal plants just for fun. If those gas plants are coming online / being utilized to a larger part of capacity and the coal plants are not being idled or shuttered its because consumers want the power! Its not like we are generating electrical potential just ground it out because we think arc-flash is cool!
The issue is the economy grew so despite efficiency improvements emissions grew.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Funny, the French have civilian-controlled nuclear power, and some of the cheapest energy in Europe. They just don't spend as much on their military scum and adventures abroad as the US does, so they have money to subsidize clean nuclear.
Let's just say it is because Americans are greedy selfish individuals that think that if you can't drive an SUV/pickup, live in a McMansion, fly to extravagant locations, and eat beef every day, you aren't living the American Dream.
For many liberals, one can lie to oneself and say that technology needs to improve and we need more alternative energy.
For many conservatives, one can line to oneself and say that climate change isn't real.
It's not fashionable to actually own it and say that American lifestyle of endless consumerism isn't sustainable.
Geez, more bog standard anti-American claptrap.
Why am I surprised in a comment to a story that's already nothing more than anti-American claptrap?
First, the US withdrew from the Paris Agreement, so whether or not the US meets its targets under that agreement is totally irrelevant.
Second, the article singles out the US when even such "must address climate change" stalwarts such as France and Germany haven't met their targets, either.
Third, the Paris Agreement goals don't even apply to China and India and Indonesia.
Fourth, what Paris Agreement goals that do exist are - by the Paris Agreement itself - entirely unenforceable, making the Paris Agreement worth less than used toilet paper.
So after you translate the Paris Agreement to reality and strip away the anti-American claptrap, you're left with a giant stinking useless turd.
But because ORANGE MAN BAD, it's not proper to point that out.
Talk about burying the lede:
While we don’t expect a repeat of 2018 this coming year , the data provides some important insights into the emission reduction challenges facing the US.
The reasons they don't expect a repeat are sprinkled through the article, e.g.:
1. The winter was extremely cold. People used more energy staying warm.
2. The economy was roaring. People traveled more. More goods were shipped. More buildings were built.
On top of this, and somewhat amazingly for what purports to be an independent research group, they chose to put a negative spin on the fact that, as they put it, "a record number of coal-fired power plants were retired last year" and replaced with natural gas (which our friend AmiMoJo then further spun into the sensationalist title of this article).
At bottom, this is just more of the unfortunate stream of SlashClickbait that is gradually swamping what used to be a useful tech blog.
I have not bothered with my local greens but where i came form (Some tiny country in Yurop) the greens were in love with natural gas. Funny. It probably has to do with combined cycle plants fast enough to be paired with intermittent energy sources that cannot be dispatched. Like the wind turbines they are fond of.
Back when gas prices were sky high at $3.50 a gallon there was a lot of interest in converting a lot of the trucking industry to compressed natural gas. In addition to being cheaper, CNG has the advantage of 1/3 lower CO2 emissions per unit energy.
That pretty much went dead when gas prices went down to $2/gallon, and the pay back period went up. CNG is substantially better than electric for trucking, and involves smaller investment, plus it actually exists NOW. The government should be providing tax breaks and the like for converting trucks to CNG.
The report itself is a good detailed estimate of emissions from various sectors along with analysis and projections. Last year's estimate was pretty accurate so this probably is as well. But nowhere do they use the words "Dire news". That's the spin from Ars Technica.
Hey Anonymous... You are full of $#!+.
What are you doing to reduce your carbon footprint?????
Me?? I'm an American. I am not greedy or selfish. I do no own a SUV, do not live in a McMansion, I do not fly to extravagant locations and haven't eaten beef in years. I am not a vegan either, I do eat chicken. I am living the American Dream though.
I am a software developer which has topped the best job in the world... https://tech.slashdot.org/story/19/01/08/2219218/software-developer-tops-list-of-us-news-world-reports-annual-best-jobs-rankings
I commuted to work by bicycle 221 days in 2018, I rode a total of 7,007 miles (11,275Km) in 2018. https://www.strava.com/athletes/20998255
Here is my ride home from work last night... 15.5 miles... https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3284066043
Here is my ride to work this morning... https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/3285321139
I rode more miles on a bicycle in 2018 than I actually drove or rode in a powered vehicle. My last physical September 2018 I was measured at 9% body fat and I am 53 years old.
For many Dip$#!+$ like you, just because you dribble bull$#!+ out of your mouth, doesn't make it true.
Natural gas produces 50-60% less CO2 than a coal plant for the same amount of energy. That means a lot of new capacity has been added to the grid.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Well right - and the political left in this country needs to internalize that just as most of the political right does but even more so because it driving absolutely the wrong policy choices on the left.
We can make some efficiency improvements certainly but there is exactly one[1] ultimate driver of environmental degradation and that is human population size per area. We have a birth rate near the replacement rate right now. There is little evidence we would need to get into people's reproductive choices. We can stop population growth by simply putting and end to immigration.
Anyone who cares about having a beautiful green America for their Children and grandchildren needs to recognize this.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Nuclear can supply all of our energy needs for the foreseeable future. Climate bed-wetters always frame our current situation as solar/wind or nothing.
We've run very old Nuclear plants well past their design lifespans safely. We would be on 3rd or 4th gen reactors by now - if we could just get some Nuclear deniers out of the way.
"There is a large and growing segment of society that believes the US is the source of all evil in the world" Well, ya think there may be a reason for it, cherub???
If nothing else comes from trump's idiotic reign it will show that the constitution needs to be idiot proofed because they've just handed it over to a group of idiots.
It was supposed that the other two branches would stop the idiot in the executive from fucking things up, but republicans are idiots and proved that you cannot rely on it unless you make it necessary for politicians to back the USA rather than their party (very stalinist, really: party before country and people) and the courts cannot do anything if they've been partisan picked by the legislative branch idiots who, lets remember, put party before country.
There will be a lot less "gentlemen's agreement" in the constutution because the current pile of rightwing fuckwits have shown that there aren't any gentlemen on the rightwing.
not a chemist here but "fossile" implies a carbon atom somewhere. ... methan, or natural gas?
"fossile fuel" implies that the carbon is intended to be "oxydized".
what luck that our air then is 1/6 oxygen (else we wouldn't) have a problem.
so coal is "pure" carbon and waste is pure carbon dioxide, a so-called greenhouse gas (not because its gaseous food for plants in a greenhouse).
so the "best" fossile fuel should be one with the least carbon atoms but the most hydrogen atoms, because adding/burning hydrogen yields water which is also a greenhouse "gas" but can rain from the sky.
thus it seems the "cleanest" fossile fuel would be
The post (suspiciously) left out the most important explanatory part of TFA:
"The transportation sector held its title as the largest source of US emissions for the third year running, as robust growth in demand for diesel and jet fuel offset a modest decline in gasoline consumption," Rhodium wrote. Industrial emissions from various types of manufacturing as well as emissions from buildings both saw significant increases in their carbon emissions in 2018.
...
In 2018, gasoline demand decreased by just 0.1 percent. But growth in the US trucking industry increased diesel demand by 3.1 percent, and demand for air travel increased jet fuel demand by 3 percent.
It's the economy, stupid. In spite of all the bullshit in the press, replacing Obama with a president who gives a shit about the economy reversed the recession and that increased economic activity caused an increase in CO2 emissions. Obama's greatest contribution to the climate was his administration's (illegal) stonewalling of all coal permits, but the rest of his anti-business policies also had a significant affect on reducing manufacturing and commerce, which reduces emissions in the US.
The right is also at fault -- we should be paying for family planning (euphemism for abortion/birth control) programs abroad as well.
Most prominent Leftists live in real mansions, do fly everywhere in private jets, drive SUVs (some armor plated), and probably do eat beef every day (but will never admit it).
Is it just me, or do the posts on environmental issues start really conservative in the morning (e.g., when people should be working), and get much less so in the evening.
Well, technically we are. Post-natal, by mowing them down in case they have something we want and they don't give it to our conditions.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Doesn't every organism consume endlessly until it is itself consumed by something else consuming endlessly?
It is one thing to replace an old efficient coal plant with either new coal or a new nat gas, but it does no good when the size of these increase to the point where you are adding more CO2.
All nations have to stop this. Here in America, we need to push Nuclear SMRs into production SOON. NuScale is a perfect example. It will not be in production until 2025/6 timeframe. With some money (for both the company and NRC), it can be put into production by 2023. That would enable us to replace a number of these coal plants with cheaper/safer nuclear SMRS. Add in more solar/wind and geo-thermal, and we can shut this down.
The one good thing missing out of this report is that over the next couple of years, America will continue downwards due to EVs replacing old cars, along with the fact that our electricity is fairly clean.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
According to Dr. Guy McPherson, reducing carbon emissions only makes things worse.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=naAFYesElAQ
Story isn't about methane. It's about diesel (vehicles) and kerosene (jet fuel). Basically people fly more and there are more products that need to be driven to the stores for people to buy. Not to even mention the whole amazon deliveries aspect. Basically rapid growth of economy leads to more flying to vacations by the wealthy city folks and more driving to get consumer products.
The reason why there's an attempt to spin this as "it's the methane" is because of increasing desperation in the green lobby with methane outcompeting pretty much everything in electricity generation in North America due to fracking phenomena. It's almost free as a by-product of fracking and it has only about half of CO2 emissions compared to coal per energy generated. So all the major wind and solar on grid is starting to run into the wall of "thanks, but unless there are massive subsidies and PR boost, we will just install a CCGT". And chemistry dictates that you'd need over double the installed capacity of methane over decommissioned coal to actually get to increase from this replacement process.
Which is obviously not occurring.
After 6 years of Slashdot being my daily go-to for technical issues of the day, I am departing because I'm tired of the SJW / Progressive / Global-Warming-Is-Going-To-Kill-Us-All nonsense.
It's too bad, really.
One parting shot - GET WOKE, GO BROKE - is a real thing.
I love this argument. Urrr mah gurd the cows are the cause, go vegan. Hah fucking retards. Human beings output orders of magnitude more emssisons than any other animal. The cow argument is made by almost exclusively by morons who believe anything anyone tells them.
That's where you got your claims, after all. And though it MAY be in Europe, it isn't a country. Just a vast on a comparison with other arses.
Brexit means brexit, by the way, so if Theresa May gets us out with no deal, then that is still 100% what you demanded: Brexit. Britain exiting the EU. You never said "Brexit means leaving the EU yet retaining access to the european markets under favourable conditions", you just whinged "BREXIT IS BREXIT!!!".
Welp, you get brexit, and now you're bitching that the conservatives generally and May specifically is trying to fuck it up by leaving without a deal.
YOU NEVER ASKED FOR ANY DEAL.
Just Brexit.
To reply to you, yes my comment was overly broad. This was somewhat intentional; to some extent one has to look at society as a whole, not just ones' individual actions. My apologies for being offensive, I applaud your individual actions.
Further, to reply to your question about what I am doing: yes, I do bicycle to work, am vegetarian, and am not a large consumer, etc.
However, the vast majority of society does not say--aha, climate change. Maybe SUVs are not a great idea.
Get off yer asses
Comment removed based on user account deletion
They just don't spend as much on their military scum and adventures abroad as the US does
Did you just seriously refer to our armed forces as scum?
No, the French count on NATO to protect them and do their bidding. FOr example, the French, Italians and Germans called up NATO alliance to force America to help them invade Libya. And if you prefer, we can let AQ/ISIS attack you as opposed to telling you 3-6 times a year when a group is about to attack.
....
And considering that we have a great deal more nuclear power than france, and worse yet, France is shutting down their reactors and replacing with AE, just like America has done in SOME places,well,
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
It's easy to spend less money on your military than America when you depend entirely on America for your defense, you sniveling beggar.
Come on, America, it's time to be the adults, look under our own beds, and assure ourselves that the Nuclear Boogeyman is just our imagination.
We need nuclear power. Safe nuclear power isn't 'theoretical', it's a reality; there are safer reactor designs on the drawing board right now, but since everyone seems to lose their bladder containment whenever the subject comes up, no money gets allocated into developing them.
Of course none of this can even begin to happen until 2020; we need to get the current bozo out of office, because his geriatric obsession with dragging us back to the 1940's, trying to resurrect the coal industry, prevents any progress in nuclear power from happening. Hell, I wouldn't put it past the guy to 'executive order' all information to-date on reactor design be destroyed, just to ensure that ass-backwards coal mining is brought back from the dead.
Once we get past that hurdle and back into a sane energy policy, new reactor designs can be developed and implemented. That'll take at least 10 years though.
Meanwhile continuing development and deployment of solar and wind power, in conjuction with large-scale energy storage strategies, should tide us over, and as capacity in these technologies increases, old-fashioned outdated filthy fossil-fuel-based power plants can be shuttered. Tear them down and build solar farms, so we can reuse the grid connections to them.
In order to facilitate faster adoption of plug-in electric vehicles, there should be new government programs to promote them. Rebates, credits for decomissioning ICE vehicles, grants to municipalities to fund change-over from diesel buses to electrics, ad campaigns promoting electrics. Get as many people as possible off ICE-based transportation and into electrics.
Meanwhile continue funding development of practical fusion technology, to eventually replace fission technology.
Also, for all we know, if we, as a species, manage to survive another hundred years or so, we might even have antimatter reactor technology (or something more exotic than that, even), and never have to worry about energy ever again.
The takeaway here is that we have to stop dwelling on the past and move forward, stop being scared little rabbits, use what we've got that's better than what we've been using, and stop sabotaging ourselves.
Take a chill pill, Nathan. I'd figure at 53 years old, you'd have realized not to take things so personally all the time. However, your virtue signalling is impressive.
But electricity wasn't the main culprit. Transportation was.
The solution is Agenda 21: depopulation.
We need more zoning and building permit requirements. We need more higher education for child bearing aged young women. We need more engrossing and addictive video games for young men. We need to promote LGBTYism bigly. We need to keep Planned Parenthood handing out contraceptives and abortions. We need more fentanyl laced drugs. We need to raise the minimum wages so high that nobody but university educated (and student debt burdened) women can get a job. We need to severely punish sexual misconduct in the workplace. We need to make it financially lucrative for women to divorce their husbands. We need more cancer causing Round Up Ready transgenic crops. We need more hellish wildfires.
HA-HA!
Doesn't matter how much we need it nor how safe it is, nukes are done in the United States. The lunatic eco-Nazis will hold violent protests anywhere anyone even suggests putting a *GASP* "nuclear" anything. "THEIR NOT SAFE!!!!!1!!11 THEY CAN"T BE MADE SAFE!@@1!!!12!@@"
I love this argument. Urrr mah gurd the cows are the cause, go vegan. Hah fucking retards. Human beings output orders of magnitude more emssisons than any other animal. The cow argument is made by almost exclusively by morons who believe anything anyone tells them.
Yes, humans (and human activity) do emit more greenhouse gasses than any other animal. But not orders-of-magnitude more. Agriculture, and in particular, livestock, is still a significant contribution. The US Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has reported that agricultural contribution to be about 18% of all greenhouse-gas emissions, with cattle-breeding as a major component.
Worse, methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2, by a factor of about 23. On the flipside, it does break down more quickly in the atmosphere than CO2.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
The US Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
Whoops, typo. Make that the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
There is no empirical data demonstrating a correlation, let alone a causality between Atmospheric CO2 Levels and Global Warming.
Smart people on here with strong agendas and even stronger second hand opinions...
Be brave, and try looking at the conflicting information and coming to your own conclusion, instead of mindlessly dismissing what you disagree with.
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-global-warming-earth-cooling-media-bias/
Perhaps where the oil companies are burning our N.G. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/at-night-giant-fields-of-burning-natural-gas-make-north-dakota-visibile-from-space-2533561/
"Thank you Mr. Trump."
The biggest problem here is supporting Donald Trump, not natural gas, not even rising emissions. Why?
Trump has repeatedly and vociferously supported coal. Natural gas is an easy and logical win versus using coal. It's literally the easiest thing you can do: Convert coal fired electrical plants to natural gas. Natural gas isn't an endpoint in an green economy but it certainly helps.
Yet Trump isn't for natural gas, or solar, or wind, or geothermal, or nuclear, or conservation. He's for "big, beautiful, clean coal". That's rather like being for "honest cheating" in sports. Trump is like an imaginary blanket to keep you warm at night: If only you really believed, you'd be warm! Trump blames you and your lack of faith for being cold.
But isn't this all theoretical? I mean Trump hasn't made empty promises based upon wishful thinking, has he? Oh yes he has:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608191/clean-coals-flagship-project-has-failed/
Eliminate all depreciation, deductions, exclusions, and grandfathering of all fossil fuels, from extraction to use, and add all cleanup as a cost.
It's called a market - you have to capture both Goods and Bads to actually have a working Capitalist economy. Letting people pollute for free has costs, specifically in dead kids.
There. Fixed.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Nothing new actually:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_multiple_unit
Does ending immigration stop population growth? All those people will stop reproducing if they're not on US soil?
The vast majority of people in the US is an immigrant or a recent descendant of immigrants. So this sounds a lot like shutting the doors behind you.
PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY WORKING & TRAVELING AND LIVING!!!!!
Claims we should all be nice and stop blaming each other, then proceeds to blame the other. Typical conservatard hypocrisy and the other half of America is getting tired of it. The adults are about to get to work "just fixing shit".
More of the American population driving Volkswagen Diesels?
Using energy, exports, been productive again.
Jobs, work and exports.
Why would anyone want to reduce US jobs, exports, productivity?
Why should the USA be held back from exporting, making products, selling services to the world?
Just the start of the USA winning again.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Correction: France talks about replacing nuclear with renewables, but it is not happening. France is already a model low-carbon nation, with twice the share of low-carbon electricity as Germany, at half the cost per kWh. Any efforts to replace nuclear with renewables will require imported gas, and increase emissions and costs.
The US is closing reactors, but that loss is replaced primarily by gas if at all, and a token amount of renewables for green-washing. A brilliant plan by gas and renewable salesmen, which will lock in reliance on gas with no path to zeroing emissions; electricity prices will trend upward indefinitely along with volatile and increasing gas prices. Reduced demand can be expected, as electricity becomes increasingly unaffordable. Success?
America is so much dirtier than France it's not even a competition. America basically doesn't have a hope in hell of ever getting their CO2 down to French levels.
You are a joke.
You use NATO more so you can have bases all over the world. And it locks in customers for your arms exporters (IE corporate welfare).
America will continue downwards
Your transport CO2 has been increasing for the last half decade WindBourne. You know this. Don't lie.
Your total CO2 increased this year, as predicted by everyone. Don't lie about this either.
The average American gets just as much coal electricity as a Chinese person. Don't pretend you are clean at all...
Not as big a lie as your others, but still WindBourne being deceitful/dishonest.
You were told 6-10 months ago America was going to increase, but you kept denying it and predicting a drop. Seems you are always wrong.
China economy has already slowed, yet you say CO2 increased quite a bit. So that makes this prediction already null and void.
China's is 2x America with 4.2x the people. Per person you are still over twice as bad.
Per person you were worse before, and your increase will make your per person even worse again. You aren't even dropping down towards China, but getting further out in front!
Just compare the lifestyles of the 3 countries you mention.
Think about how an American lives his day to day life. Now imagine a Chinese person, and now an Indian. Do you think it's a coincidence that the CO2 is directly related to the level of consumption, level of development, level of waste? American with their big house, 2 cars (big cars), AC etc. A Chinese person with 1 (small cars) or no cars, smaller house, maybe no AC. An Indian with a bicycle no AC and shitting in a field.
It's obvious. (unless you are paid to look the other way) It's natural those other countries will want to develop and be more like America. Who are you to tell them they can't? As they develop their energy use will increase, it's just common sense.
A big rich country like America can't afford to go green, but poor developing countries are expected to? (poor developed country, if you want to pretend China is as developed as America.)
You can't even keep your CO2 steady, but you still complain and worry about them catching up to you? Why don't you drop down towards their level, their lifestyle if you think it's such a big problem? You won't, you feel entitled to pollute twice as much as Chinese people and 10 times an Indian.
America is so dirty because they use the most energy. The source being a little cleaner doesn't mean jack if you use 5x as much...
But you are paid to not understand this, so it won't get in your bubble.
Which is why per person you are close to the top of the world CO2 polluters.
Ideally, if we restart our nuclear power with SMRs, we will probably use a combination of battery/recharging when going through slow cities/stops.
So how do you propose to dispose of a SMR at the end of its service life? Have you thought this idea through?
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
More made up WindBourne shit.
America is the home of SUV/pickups. Find any evidence of what you are claiming...
Americans are among the world leaders in eating beef, 4th per capita.
You eat twice as much beef as China... with less than 1/4 of the people...
Maybe you aren't paid to look this stupid.
People Older Than 65 Share the Most Fake News, Study Finds
Maybe you are just a gullible old fart.
A SUV's can spew out as much CO2/NOX as a Honda or a Toyota too. It just depends on its usage. People that commute 50 miles to and from work are not driving SUV's they are driving Hondas or econo-boxes. The majority of large SUV drivers are not commuting 50 miles one way. Two people at where I work who drive the Tahoe class SUV commute less than 10 miles to work. I will bet dollars to doughnuts that the guy driving the 50 miles one way is contributing more CO2/NOX driving a Honda than the guy that drives the Tahoe less than 10.
The problem really isn't SUV's, it is the total output of carbon. And you are correct, most people don't say aha... climate change I should get rid of my SUV, like most people don't think Ahh.. Gun crime is horrible where I live, maybe I should give up my gun and any means of protecting myself. Doesn't happen. Most people will decide to change their lifestyle and move.
Society as a whole starts with the individual. I'm doing my part about global warming... well, except for methane, especially the morning after eating tacos at Taco Bell the night before.
Start doing your part and other people will take notice.
The only way that I virtue signal is with my middle finger.
We polluted first and we are used to it / entitled to do it. You other cleaner countries who are already cleaner, will just have to be even cleaner than us or not develop, because well 'fuck you'.
Get back to us when the US has cut down to European and Chinese levels.
Fully agree, the environment only cares that an America puts out more CO2 than a European and a Chinaman added together. Not that you are richer and more developed. Again, half your levels and get back to us...
Stop pretending to be green.
Yet per person 1/2 as polluting as USA...
You taking WindBourne trolling lessons? Ask him for the advanced classes, that's all old fake boring news.
It takes a great deal of milk to produce a small amount of butter. And much of the waste is in the form of toxic run off that damages ecosystems in rivers and streams.
Did you just seriously refer to our armed forces as scum?
Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot for a moment that the forces we use to topple governments we disagree agree with and murder thousands of citizens in other countries, that's something we're supposed to bow down to and worship. Thank you for reminding me that our citizenry is supposed to turn off their brains, and simply worship symbols like our flag and our eagles, and our tanks.
Military attacks are the greatest failures of human beings. The mass murder we try to justify as "glorious combat" is the worst that humanity can get. They are our failures as moral people.
Make your lies no so easily checked WindBourne, you take all the fun out of it.
In December, retail sales of sedans, multipurpose vehicles and sport utility vehicles plummeted 19% -- the seventh straight monthly drop.
You predictions are worthless WindBourne.