GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

6 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

More lying crap. The costs are up because the cost of coal and natural gas are through the roof. If it weren't for renewables the average cost would have tripled. 

It can be easily shown with these graphs. Renewables have barely changed in the past year but the price of coal and natural gas have skyrocketed over that time period. Note the correlation between all three costs. Electricity started going up the exact same month gas and coal started going up. If you were a real economist you would look at the real data before posting such lies.

You have it backwards, Jay, as usual. Coal and gas go up because Green failed, and coal had to ride to the rescue.

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

5 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Affordable until you start adding up all the fuel and maintenance cost. 

Still more affordable, you cannot find a charge on a long trip.

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

3 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

 

The total number of light duty registered vehicles in America is 253 million.

 

And the cumulative sales of EVs has just reached 2.7 million. EVs have crossed that 1% of the fleet threshold .

Those are not the numbers, you left out 2021 and 2022 for the ICE....Jay, we live in 2022.

And you left out heavy duty and motorcycles. 

Well below 1% of the vehicle stock.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Those are not the numbers, you left out 2021 and 2022 for the ICE....Jay, we live in 2022.

And you left out heavy duty and motorcycles. 

Well below 1% of the vehicle stock.

We are in the middle of 2022 and 2021 fleet numbers are not out yet. The EV sales are current to last month. However you can easily see that the fleet numbers barely move from year to year. The only dramatic change over the past year has been the continued exponential growth of EV sales as shown in the chart.

Heavy duty and motorcycles are different markets. EVs are over 1% of the US light duty vehicle fleet.

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

25 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Still more affordable, you cannot find a charge on a long trip.

Reality of course says you are clueless.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

 

36 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Bottom line...green doesn't work. You need coal to bail you out.

Yeah, that is no doubt why coal use in the US is decreasing while renewables keep increasing.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

58 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

You have it backwards, Jay, as usual. Coal and gas go up because Green failed, and coal had to ride to the rescue.

Yes we know you don't understand economics or energy markets.

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

46 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

We are in the middle of 2022 and 2021 fleet numbers are not out yet. The EV sales are current to last month. However you can easily see that the fleet numbers barely move from year to year. The only dramatic change over the past year has been the continued exponential growth of EV sales as shown in the chart.

Heavy duty and motorcycles are different markets. EVs are over 1% of the US light duty vehicle fleet.

 

Well, you are way off track again, using the wrong year base numbers to make wrong calculations.

I guess you skipped your math and economics courses.

Heavy duty and motorcycles are intrinsic to the transportation of people and goods, work vehicles are necessary to keep your food on the table, without tractors you would starve.

Less than a fraction of 1%.

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

48 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Reality of course says you are clueless.

Looks like something on a national board, but try finding one when you need it on a trip. There is a long distance between those dots.

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

19 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes we know you don't understand economics or energy markets.

You just got it backwards again, Jay, no need for you to be embarrassed. Just your nature.

Coal had to jump in when Green failed.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,375]

Oil is roaring along with huge demand pushing up the price.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Oil-Likely-To-Hit-200-SEB-Group.html

"Oil prices are likely to soar past $200 per barrel if G7 manages to cap the price of Russian crude oil, according to chief commodities analyst at Swedish bank SEB Group."

Edited June 30, 2022 by Ecocharger

[Rob Plant + 2,617]

12 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

I value comfort. A better ride is important for long distance travel.

Travel luggage fits well into the Mustang.

I'm all for comfort especially on long distances but the question i have to ask is have you ever driven a Tesla over a long distance so you can compare the two?

[Rob Plant + 2,617]

Hydrogen-powered lorry to be mass produced by Essex fleet operator

https://news.sky.com/story/hydrogen-powered-lorry-to-be-mass-produced-by-essex-fleet-operator-12642867

https://www.circularonline.co.uk/news/uk-government-launches-plan-for-a-world-leading-hydrogen-economy/?gclid=CjwKCAjwk_WVBhBZEiwAUHQCmV1S4_IZBlXzzWSRQL91l4yV1cTR8w0JInQlmqsRyDaRxKMEKbfYehoCF3sQAvD_BwE

Edited June 30, 2022 by Rob Plant

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Looks like something on a national board, but try finding one when you need it on a trip. There is a long distance between those dots.

You don't have to try and find one. Just tell the Tesla where you are going and it will plan a route for you across the country with charging stops. The chargers are located within driving distance of each other. People drive long distances in their Teslas all the time.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Well, you are way off track again, using the wrong year base numbers to make wrong calculations.

I guess you skipped your math and economics courses.

Heavy duty and motorcycles are intrinsic to the transportation of people and goods, work vehicles are necessary to keep your food on the table, without tractors you would starve.

Less than a fraction of 1%.

Oh they are the right years and the right calculations. You just aren't smart enough to figure out basic economics. From 2016 to 2020 registered light vehicles increased by only 6 million. You could add up to 17 million to the 2020 number and the current cumulative EV sales would still equal 1%.

Total registered vehicles including heavy duty and motorcycles actually decreased from 2019 to 2020 and are at  275.9 million. EVs will reach one percent of that number next month. 

https://www.bts.gov/content/number-us-aircraft-vehicles-vessels-and-other-conveyances

Just keep making a fool of yourself.

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

You just got it backwards again, Jay, no need for you to be embarrassed. Just your nature.

Coal had to jump in when Green failed.

If green failed then why is green energy in the US increasing while coal in the US is decreasing? The US disproves your silly thesis.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

10 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Oil is roaring along with huge demand pushing up the price.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Oil-Likely-To-Hit-200-SEB-Group.html

"Oil prices are likely to soar past $200 per barrel if G7 manages to cap the price of Russian crude oil, according to chief commodities analyst at Swedish bank SEB Group."

You just can't figure out the difference between supply and demand can you? The problem is a lack of supply because of the war in Ukraine and the embargo on Russian oil. We all know this except you. That is what that whole article is about.

 

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Jay McKinsey

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

13 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Yes we know you don't understand economics or energy markets.

       

I'm quite sure you may quite well grasp the economic outcome of the below ruling. Oppression has left the building.

 

Supreme Court restricts the EPA's authority to mandate carbon emissions reductions

 

By a vote of 6 to 3, the court said that any time an agency does something big and new – in this case addressing climate change – the regulation is presumptively invalid, unless Congress has specifically authorized regulating in this sphere.

 

Edited June 30, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

       

I'm quite sure you may quite well grasp the economic outcome of the below ruling. Oppression has left the building.

 

Supreme Court restricts the EPA's authority to mandate carbon emissions reductions

 

By a vote of 6 to 3, the court said that any time an agency does something big and new – in this case addressing climate change – the regulation is presumptively invalid, unless Congress has specifically authorized regulating in this sphere.

 

It won't make much of a difference. Fossil fuels have priced themselves out of the market. However I doubt you can understand that economic outcome.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

3 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

It won't make much of a difference. Fossil fuels have priced themselves out of the market. However I doubt you can understand that economic outcome.

Next stop...

Securities and Exchange Commission

The Securities and Exchange Commission oversees securities exchanges, securities brokers and dealers, investment advisors, and mutual funds in an effort to promote fair dealing, the disclosure of important market information, and to prevent fraud.

 

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Next stop...

Securities and Exchange Commission

The Securities and Exchange Commission oversees securities exchanges, securities brokers and dealers, investment advisors, and mutual funds in an effort to promote fair dealing, the disclosure of important market information, and to prevent fraud.

 

What are you babbling about now?

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

18 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

What are you babbling about now?

Have a long read, activistism has had its in legs cutoff.

https://www.justice.gov/enrd/chevron-usa-v-natural-res-def-council#:~:text=Chevron is one of the,has been delegated to administer.

administrative law cases decided by the Supreme Court in the past half-century. It provides principles to determine the extent to which a court reviewing agency action should give deference to the agency’s construction of a statute that the agency has been delegated to administer.

The case first arose in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as a challenge to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations under the Clean Air Act defining the statutory term “stationary source.” Ordinarily, a permit may be issued for new or modified major stationary sources of air pollution only if the permittee meets various stringent conditions. Under the regulation challenged in Chevron, EPA allowed the states to treat all pollution control devices in a single plant as one “stationary source,” such that a polluter could install or modify control equipment in the plant without meeting the new source requirements, as long as the alteration would not increase aggregate emissions for the plant.

         

Below is a example of what now will unwind

 

 

US judge temporarily closes controversial oil pipeline

https://www.deccanherald.com/international/world-news-politics/us-judge-temporarily-closes-controversial-oil-pipeline-858009.html

Edited June 30, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

11 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Have a long read, activistism has had its in legs cutoff.

https://www.justice.gov/enrd/chevron-usa-v-natural-res-def-council#:~:text=Chevron is one of the,has been delegated to administer.

administrative law cases decided by the Supreme Court in the past half-century. It provides principles to determine the extent to which a court reviewing agency action should give deference to the agency’s construction of a statute that the agency has been delegated to administer.

The case first arose in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as a challenge to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations under the Clean Air Act defining the statutory term “stationary source.” Ordinarily, a permit may be issued for new or modified major stationary sources of air pollution only if the permittee meets various stringent conditions. Under the regulation challenged in Chevron, EPA allowed the states to treat all pollution control devices in a single plant as one “stationary source,” such that a polluter could install or modify control equipment in the plant without meeting the new source requirements, as long as the alteration would not increase aggregate emissions for the plant.

         

Below is a example of what now will unwind

 

 

US judge temporarily closes controversial oil pipeline

Nope, closing the Dakota Access Pipeline had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,539]

9 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

Nope, closing the Dakota Access Pipeline had nothing to do with the Clean Air Act.

You Jay are clueless, often you utter the word capitulation. Green energy has just been nuked! This Clean Air Act has been invalidated. Things of this nature are extreme the pendulum has swung sharply...perhaps to sharply in a sense.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/30/us-supreme-court-says-epa-cant-regulate-carbon-pollution-under-clean-air-act/

In a move that by now surprises absolutely no one, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does not have the authority to regulate carbon pollution from existing power plants.

The 6-3 decision, with the three liberal justices dissenting, makes it increasingly likely that an act of Congress will be required to create regulations to rein in planet-warming emissions.

Edited June 30, 2022 by Eyes Wide Open

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

You Jay are clueless, often you utter the word capitulation. Green energy has just been nuked! This Clean Air Act has been invalidated. Things of this nature are extreme the pendulum has swung sharply.

https://techcrunch.com/2022/06/30/us-supreme-court-says-epa-cant-regulate-carbon-pollution-under-clean-air-act/

That oil pipeline wasn't shutdown because of carbon. Green energy is doing just fine and the people want clean air so this is going to backfire on you. Green energy is less expensive than fossil so it is going to win.