Climate Change Thread

[Satchmo]

4 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

There is lots of data showing the climate is changing, as it always has been. New data is coming out that humans don't have the impact they think they do. 

 

All while some countries destroy their economy in the name of social betterment and others decide not to take part at all. 

 

There needs to be balance. Don't move away from gas and diesel until something better and more reliable is available. 

Gotta say I just can't agree with the bolded statement, apart from correctly saying climate has changed before. 

 

Unless of course you can point me to the new data you mention and it seems plausible.

 

(Don't agree much with the other statements but one thing at a time...)

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, RupertKBD said:

 

It's interesting to see how the arguments have evolved....

 

Not too long ago on CDC, posters like Forsberg and Strome were arguing that CC was a "hoax". The scientists that called it settled were either fakes, or they were just saying it to maintain their funding....

 

These days, nobody is foolish enough to try and argue the "hoax", or even the "overblown" position, so the go-to gambit against CC mitigation methods is always about finding reasons that they won't work.

 

I fully expect those positions to look equally as foolish as the "hoax" position in a few years.....hopefully it's not too late by that time.

 

 

I know, anything to keep the oil money flowing. It's why I like the govt pushing ahead on investments in batteries and other changes and not getting bogged down in discussions that are only designed to delay things.

 

 

[Bob Long]

42 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

There is lots of data showing the climate is changing, as it always has been. New data is coming out that humans don't have the impact they think they do. 

 

All while some countries destroy their economy in the name of social betterment and others decide not to take part at all. 

 

There needs to be balance. Don't move away from gas and diesel until something better and more reliable is available. 

 

Let's say that's correct, we still have to deal with climate change. Adding to the carbon problem still isn't the right idea.

[Johngould21]

4 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

I know, anything to keep the oil money flowing. It's why I like the govt pushing ahead on investments in batteries and other changes and not getting bogged down in discussions that are only designed to delay things.

 

 

I've always said Big Oil has a horse in this race, and it's very big. Which is why I don't buy all the rhetoric over EV's. I'd like to see how much they spend on anti EV systems world wide. Saying that, plug ins are still the best option for now.

[The Arrogant Worms]

CNN’s Breanna Keilar Marvels At 20-Foot ‘Monster Wave’ That Swept Californians Off Their Feet

https://www.mediaite.com/weird/cnns-breanna-keilar-marvels-at-20-foot-monster-wave-that-swept-californians-off-their-feet/

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, Johngould21 said:

I've always said Big Oil has a horse in this race, and it's very big. Which is why I don't buy all the rhetoric over EV's. I'd like to see how much they spend on anti EV systems world wide. Saying that, plug ins are still the best option for now.

 

thats what I have. PHEVs aren't perfect for sure, but it suits what I need for now. 

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, 5forFighting said:

There is lots of data showing the climate is changing, as it always has been. New data is coming out that humans don't have the impact they think they do. 

 

All while some countries destroy their economy in the name of social betterment and others decide not to take part at all. 

 

There needs to be balance. Don't move away from gas and diesel until something better and more reliable is available. 

 

Such hyperbole. Investing in, and legislating rules for greener tech is not "destroying the economy".

[Bob Long]

15 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

Such hyperbole. Investing in, and legislating rules for greener tech is not "destroying the economy".

 

Maybe we should just let Alberta run wild, they can just pay the rest of us not to work.

[Wilbur]

Just now, Bob Long said:

 

Maybe we should just let Alberta run wild, they can just pay the rest of us not to work.

I thought they were doing that already? 

[Bob Long]

Just now, Wilbur said:

I thought they were doing that already? 

 

I wish. Cut me that cheque and I'll even wear the hat. 

[aGENT]

18 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

Maybe we should just let Alberta run wild, they can just pay the rest of us not to work.

 

No, because it would be "their" oil and money. Most of which would likely end up in US pockets because Albertans prefer to share "their" profits with rich Americans vs fellow Canadians.

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, aGENT said:

 

No, because it would be "their" oil and money. Most of which would likely end up in US pockets because Albertans prefer to share "their" profits with rich Americans vs fellow Canadians.

 

Damn. Oh well, back to the blockade I guess.

[The Lock]

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

I thought they were doing that already? 

 

"Free-range Albertans?" All we need is a fence around the province.

[5forFighting]

On 12/29/2023 at 1:48 PM, Bob Long said:

 

I know, anything to keep the oil money flowing. It's why I like the govt pushing ahead on investments in batteries and other changes and not getting bogged down in discussions that are only designed to delay things.

 

 

Without oil money, this country collapses overnight. 

 

[5forFighting]

On 12/29/2023 at 1:50 PM, Bob Long said:

 

Let's say that's correct, we still have to deal with climate change. Adding to the carbon problem still isn't the right idea.

I am sure more tax will fix it.

[Bob Long]

59 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

Without oil money, this country collapses overnight. 

 

 

Neat. Why would that stop overnight?

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, 5forFighting said:

I am sure more tax will fix it.

 

Effective taxation can work well. PP isn't going to give you any significant tax holiday.

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, 5forFighting said:

I am sure more tax will fix it.

The EV people like their current savings on transport but I question where they think the money will come from to maintain roads once hydrocarbons are shelved? Current governments both federal and provincial rake in billion of $'s from road tax and carbon tax and use it to subsidize EV. At some point the government will have to increase hydro costs to recover revenue. 

[Bob Long]

2 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

The EV people like their current savings on transport but I question where they think the money will come from to maintain roads once hydrocarbons are shelved? Current governments both federal and provincial rake in billion of $'s from road tax and carbon tax and use it to subsidize EV. At some point the government will have to increase hydro costs to recover revenue. 

 

If the net taxes are the same, who cares if oil taxes go down but car charging goes up?

[MattJVD]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

If the net taxes are the same, who cares if oil taxes go down but car charging goes up?

I expect the rebates on EV purchases to phase out eventually. But yeah, the road taxes currently on gasoline would just be shifted to charging stations. Hard to capture home charging in that, but that's probably fine to leave out and just have a road rax on publicly available chargers.

 

A 50% road tax would still be vastly cheaper than a tank of gas. Costs $11 bucks to fill up my Ioniq 5 at a for-profit charger, that gives me ~490km range. Taking 50% on top of that and having a $16.50 "tank of gas" is still pretty great.

[aGENT]

3 hours ago, Boudrias said:

The EV people like their current savings on transport but I question where they think the money will come from to maintain roads once hydrocarbons are shelved? Current governments both federal and provincial rake in billion of $'s from road tax and carbon tax and use it to subsidize EV. At some point the government will have to increase hydro costs to recover revenue. 

As others mentioned, you just adjust taxes to cover EVs to continue funding infrastructure.

[Bob Long]

2 hours ago, MattJVD said:

I expect the rebates on EV purchases to phase out eventually. But yeah, the road taxes currently on gasoline would just be shifted to charging stations. Hard to capture home charging in that, but that's probably fine to leave out and just have a road rax on publicly available chargers.

 

A 50% road tax would still be vastly cheaper than a tank of gas. Costs $11 bucks to fill up my Ioniq 5 at a for-profit charger, that gives me ~490km range. Taking 50% on top of that and having a $16.50 "tank of gas" is still pretty great.

 

Yep. The only difference is people heavily invested in oil aren't getting paid.

[RupertKBD]

We could also use some of the money we'd save from not having to battle huge wildfires and massive floods every year....

[Gurn]

The Model T ford had a top speed of 42 mph and between 13-21 miles per gallon efficiency.

With a 10 US gallon tank the car  had 130- 210 miles range on a tank of gas.

Took a few years before owning a car was 'better' than owning a horse.

 

ICE vehicles sure have improved over the years.

I expect Electric cars will do the same.

[aGENT]

8 hours ago, 5forFighting said:

Without oil money, this country collapses overnight. 

 

 

First - As others pointed out, nobody is suggesting this happen "overnight".

 

Second - How do you think the oil industry (which whether you like it or not IS a sunset industry) became such an important part of this country's economy?