Green Energy (wind, solar, battery vehicles) - What is the real objective?

[TheTrooper]

Green Energy: What’s REALLY Going On?​

 

[Magyars]

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Green Energy: What’s REALLY Going On?​

I think your link is broken.

 

[TheTrooper]

I think your link is broken.

It is functioning fine on this end. Here is another source if interested.

 

[DN40SW]

It's obvious, the gubment wants to have total control of EVERYTHING in EVERYONE'S lives. From what we drive and how far & where we can go, to how we cook our food, heat our water & dry our clothes, to how we heat and cool our homes.

 

[Leo]

To me an electric car is like a 100 mile dog leash.

Went visiting this weekend, still in this state. We ended up with 320 miles on the single tank of gas. Rode comfortably with 4 full sized adults in the car and had plenty of room in the trunk for luggage and purchases. Got back to Lafayette, refueled in 5 minutes, including a bio break. Drove to the other side of town to deliver a purchased item to it's new owner. We were home in plenty of time for dinner and a nap.

That is part of life I would really miss. It would also make zero difference to whatever cause the lefty jerks want to try to sell. That would make my loss, lets just say, "stressful".

 

[wtburnette]

It's obvious, the gubment wants to have total control of EVERYTHING in EVERYONE'S lives. From what we drive and how far & where we can go, to how we cook our food, heat our water & dry our clothes, to how we heat and cool our homes.

Control. Power. Transfer of wealth. That's pretty much it. Anyone who believes the climate hysteria is a moron.

 

[Leadeye]

Always follow the money.

Whenever the government changes or institutes new laws the economic doors both open and close. Over the years in the chemical industry I've seen changing regulations destroy mature technologies and replace them with much more expensive and lower quality ones.

You might get the idea after a while that people buy laws and regulations to make money.

 

[xwing]

Control. Power. Transfer of wealth. That's pretty much it. Anyone who believes the climate hysteria is a moron.

That is it entirely. The leftists want more control of our lives. And they want to force people into spending big money that filters into their pockets. They are stealing from average people and putting all this "green" money into the leftist coastal elites.

 

[Hkindiana]

On word - CONTROL

 

[duanewade]

Posts 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 & 10 put it as truthfully as you can get. Anyone that believes the that our government is pushing on us is full of

 

[Libertarian01]

As I see it there is no great conspiracy there amongst most "environmentalists" or environmentally friendly folks. They simply want clean energy that doesn't pollute the environment like coal, oil, gas, and other fossil fuels do. They've been sold on the benefits of "clean" energy.

What nobody with an agenda mentions is the downsides or weaknesses of "clean" energy. The environmentalists think solar panels everywhere would be great without realizing that the energy it takes to make the things is mostly "dirty" and will never be balanced in many geographic locations. They aren't sold on many of the toxic materials in solar panels or electric batteries polluting the environment, or windmills disturbing the mating cycles of nearby animals. This completely ignores the large birds killed every year by giant windmills.

There is a small portion of the earths geography where people and perfect wind/solar combinations are right for going totally green. My understanding is that it is about 10% of the worlds geography and most of it is in the SW United States.

For the green industry they just want money, like EVERY other industry. So they sell their upside and never mention their negatives, or downplay them if confronted.

We humans have done bad things to our environment. There can be no denying that. To what extent it is irreversible I don't know. To what extent can be measured is limited. We know that pollution destroyed the oyster population in New York harbor and they're trying to bring it back. We know that we devastated bison herds out west. We intentionally hunted many birds to extinction in the last couple of centuries. Burning one (1) gallon of gasoline in a car creates over 19# of CO2. There are currently about 1 billion cars on the road worldwide. If 25% of them drive daily that is 250,000,000 cars. If those that are driven only consume 1/2 gallon of gas daily that is 2.5 billion tons of CO2 added daily. That's not nothing. Of course nature can easily swamp that with a volcano somewhere but that doesn't alter the fact that we do put the human finger on scales in a big way, from pollution to altering forests and lands to farming with less diversity of crops.

All that said the greenies ignore other facts. Our population is decreasing. China is in freefall. So by the number of humans alone the damage will reduce over the next several decades. We have improved fuel efficiency over the last 100 years so we're on a good track there. I'd love to see more nuclear power used everywhere but that's not on the table for awhile. We're re-shoring our industry to the USA and Mexico which will greatly reduce supply lines and thus reduce transportation emissions.

In the end anyone who supports anything doesn't want to see or discuss the negatives of their chosen path. We all do this. We support the 2nd Amendment and gun rights without ever wanting to bring up mass shootings that ARE more problematic here than elsewhere. We certainly don't want to bring up how easy it is to murder with a gun over a knife of club. There certainly is a downside to easy access to firearms, we just chose to not bring it up. We argue with those who do. I'll certainly argue that the need to protect ourselves from criminals and governmental tyranny outweighs the tragedy of firearms misuse, but that doesn't mean I want to focus on the negatives of my beliefs.

Cleaning up the environment is not something anyone is against. Most everyone would support cleaner air, water, and less toxins in the land that we've put there. This is an extremely complicated issue that no one solution can fix. Solar, wind, and EV's aren't a solution in the way that many think they are. But many have been sold on this idea so once convinced they are hard to dissuade.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Ingomike]

As I see it there is no great conspiracy there amongst most "environmentalists" or environmentally friendly folks. They simply want clean energy that doesn't pollute the environment like coal, oil, gas, and other fossil fuels do. They've been sold on the benefits of "clean" energy.

What nobody with an agenda mentions is the downsides or weaknesses of "clean" energy. The environmentalists think solar panels everywhere would be great without realizing that the energy it takes to make the things is mostly "dirty" and will never be balanced in many geographic locations. They aren't sold on many of the toxic materials in solar panels or electric batteries polluting the environment, or windmills disturbing the mating cycles of nearby animals. This completely ignores the large birds killed every year by giant windmills.

There is a small portion of the earths geography where people and perfect wind/solar combinations are right for going totally green. My understanding is that it is about 10% of the worlds geography and most of it is in the SW United States.

For the green industry they just want money, like EVERY other industry. So they sell their upside and never mention their negatives, or downplay them if confronted.

We humans have done bad things to our environment. There can be no denying that. To what extent it is irreversible I don't know. To what extent can be measured is limited. We know that pollution destroyed the oyster population in New York harbor and they're trying to bring it back. We know that we devastated bison herds out west. We intentionally hunted many birds to extinction in the last couple of centuries. Burning one (1) gallon of gasoline in a car creates over 19# of CO2. There are currently about 1 billion cars on the road worldwide. If 25% of them drive daily that is 250,000,000 cars. If those that are driven only consume 1/2 gallon of gas daily that is 2.5 billion tons of CO2 added daily. That's not nothing. Of course nature can easily swamp that with a volcano somewhere but that doesn't alter the fact that we do put the human finger on scales in a big way, from pollution to altering forests and lands to farming with less diversity of crops.

All that said the greenies ignore other facts. Our population is decreasing. China is in freefall. So by the number of humans alone the damage will reduce over the next several decades. We have improved fuel efficiency over the last 100 years so we're on a good track there. I'd love to see more nuclear power used everywhere but that's not on the table for awhile. We're re-shoring our industry to the USA and Mexico which will greatly reduce supply lines and thus reduce transportation emissions.

In the end anyone who supports anything doesn't want to see or discuss the negatives of their chosen path. We all do this. We support the 2nd Amendment and gun rights without ever wanting to bring up mass shootings that ARE more problematic here than elsewhere. We certainly don't want to bring up how easy it is to murder with a gun over a knife of club. There certainly is a downside to easy access to firearms, we just chose to not bring it up. We argue with those who do. I'll certainly argue that the need to protect ourselves from criminals and governmental tyranny outweighs the tragedy of firearms misuse, but that doesn't mean I want to focus on the negatives of my beliefs.

Cleaning up the environment is not something anyone is against. Most everyone would support cleaner air, water, and less toxins in the land that we've put there. This is an extremely complicated issue that no one solution can fix. Solar, wind, and EV's aren't a solution in the way that many think they are. But many have been sold on this idea so once convinced they are hard to dissuade.

Regards,

Doug

This post seems to be based on good intentions of good people. Now do bad intentions of those that wish to control the masses, push one world order, and the usurpation of freedom as we have known it with top down edicts…

 

[BigRed]

Q: Green Energy (wind, solar, battery vehicles) - What is the real objective?​

A: Control​

 

[TheTrooper]

I would argue the biggest economic drivers and proponents of “green” energy really do not give a rip about the environment or Truth. Only power and control.

Listen to what they say, then watch what they do.

 

[Leo]

We keep hearing CO2 C02 CO2 like it is nuclear waste. It is what you exhale. It is also what feeds plant life that converts it back to oxygen.

Proportion is everything in a story. I was watching some testimony before some government bureaucrats. The magic number on C02 is supposedly .4%. The highest current reading is .5%. The control zombies are willing to starve 75% of the earths population to death to "control pollution", over 1/10th of a percent. Since we could not measure it 2000 years ago, we really have no idea what it was before the industrial age.

My work required me to keep abreast of the Montreal Protocol in 1995. The hole in the ozone layer was a big subject. Do you know when we found the hole? It was found the first time we had reliable instrumentation to find and measure it. The theory that we caused it is still a theory. That hole has probably been getting bigger and smaller at different times since Noah climbed out of the ark.

If I was King the priority would be to quit having evil empires like monsanto adulterate the food. They have gotten rich taking the nutrition out. The fact that the void is filled with unhealthy compounds is not seen as a problem for monsanto, as long as their bank accounts are getting fat.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Tesla driver dies in fatal shooting at Supercharger station after 'argument over charger'

A Tesla driver died in a fatal shooting at a Supercharger station in Denver, Colorado, over a dispute regarding charging...

electrek.co

Sounds as if owning one can be dangerous.

 

[TheTrooper]

 

[Libertarian01]

This post seems to be based on good intentions of good people. Now do bad intentions of those that wish to control the masses, push one world order, and the usurpation of freedom as we have known it with top down edicts…

I don't disagree with the top having an agenda. But let us be really honest here, the other side has an agenda of control too. The tobacco industry fought regulations (control) and lied about the chemicals they put in cigarettes (not talking pipes or cigars), the oil industry has wanted to stay in control with fossil fuels. In other words, the status quo IS keeping someone in control of the masses.

To make good policy, as anyone would want to, takes power. That power can be used to make that good policy or to make bad policy. Even good policy can turn bad with overreach.

For example, I would LOVE to get rid of qualified immunity. In my opinion it is used too often to protect bad actors. At the same time I wouldn't want to see LEOs worried about losing their homes for pulling someone over for speeding. So overreach can be problematic.

Many on these boards will remember a time when it took 100 watts of power to make a light bulb produce 100 lumens of light. Then there was a federal policy that eventually banned the olde technology and people were p****d. They stocked up on garbage technology just to stick it to... WHO? Themselves. They just spend more money for the same amount of light a more efficient bulb can produce. When a new technology allowed for the same amount of light to be produced at a massively lower amount of energy that was a good thing. Should the Fed have pushed a ban? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. American auto manufacturers sure didn't innovate squat while they controlled the American market. Even when gas prices were going up they didn't improve. In their case the market intervened because Americans started buying Toyota's and Honda's and Mazda's because they got a LOT better millage than Chevy or Ford or Dodge.

In some cases the market will push improvements and in others not. Why? I have no idea.

The big propaganda push I have heard about is the fear of nuclear energy. As I understand it fear of nuclear was fomented by the Soviet Union so that we wouldn't become too energy independent. They wanted us fighting amongst ourselves for one, and for another dependent upon overseas oil that could have been disrupted.

I don't see conspiracies that are secret cabals or elite power brokers. I see self-interested parties looking at meeting their most basic needs and making a LOT of money doing so. People are motivated by greed of money.

Here is a very long winded example of how I see things. Take oil. Presume it has been found and drilled. Now it is on the tanker. The shipping industry wants to go as FAST as possible along the shortest route possible to maximize profits. So they lobby for laws that allow them to hall butt and reduce costs, thus increasing profits. However, the insurance industry wants maximum safety regulations in place to reduce risk and thus not pay out on their policies, so they lobby for regulations that will reduce risk and thus reducing payouts, maximizing their profits. The banks that loan money to oil shippers want their clients to make money so they can be paid back, so they might lobby a little for reduced regulations as well. But the power industry that burns oil and gas for energy to sell also wants it as cheap as possible, so they lobby for reduced regulations that reduce costs. Now the fishing industry has an interest in not having oil spills and ruining their catch for years, so they lobby for increased regulations on oil shipping but reduced regulations on themselves. And on and on and on it goes.

People from each of these industry don't "conspire" with one another as I see it, they simply think the same because of the nature of their work.

I think of it this way: ask 100 prosecutors, all graduates from Notre Dame or IU, so the same schools, same professors, etc. What are the major problems with the criminal justice system and what should be done to correct it? Now ask 100 lawyers who are criminal defense attorneys who took the same classes from the same schools and the same professors the same questions.

I would surmise that the prosecutors will come up with the same basic problems and same general conclusions amongst themselves. And the criminal defense attorneys will name different problems and come up with different solutions than the prosecutors. However, there may be some overlap with each other, but each will see the alleged problems from a different angle. That would not a conspiracy make, just a mindset.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Tombs]

To me an electric car is like a 100 mile dog leash.

Went visiting this weekend, still in this state. We ended up with 320 miles on the single tank of gas. Rode comfortably with 4 full sized adults in the car and had plenty of room in the trunk for luggage and purchases. Got back to Lafayette, refueled in 5 minutes, including a bio break. Drove to the other side of town to deliver a purchased item to it's new owner. We were home in plenty of time for dinner and a nap.

That is part of life I would really miss. It would also make zero difference to whatever cause the lefty jerks want to try to sell. That would make my loss, lets just say, "stressful".

I agree with this based on how electric cars are currently, but that's not to say the technology is at fault.

Electric cars were the first cars, and a dumb electric car would provide even more autonomy than a gasoline powered one. (Are you going to refine your own gas? Do you have access to a crude well? I bet you can think of a million ways to charge a battery with stuff in your garage.)

The way they are built now is the dream of any tyrant, being able to completely mass disable the public's transportation.

But more to the topic, the whole green agenda is a scam and an obvious one. It's all targeted on attacking the US, while the US is one of the cleanest producers of energy IN THE WORLD.
If talk of regulating emissions and green energy doesn't include nuking china, the person is trying to scam you.