GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[TailingsPond + 502]

4 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

 

Let us start here shall we?

No, lets not.

You are off track once again.

I can point out plenty of examples of ICE automaker failures.  You need to use logic.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,550]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Please do not put your words into my mouth, unless you can show me those words coming out of my mouth.

 

There is some merit towards your thoughts. Yet at the same time guilt by association does open a plausible discussion does it not? 

To be continued.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,550]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

No, lets not.

You are off track once again.

I can point out plenty of examples of ICE automaker failures.  You need to use logic.

Logic you say? A world class automaker losing billions on a heavily government subsidized EV line of of autos...and after 6 yrs of development and countless billions of wealth lost! And they still can't produce EV jalopies?

EV jalopies

 

Videographer: Qilai Shen/Bloomberg

China’s Abandoned, Obsolete Electric Cars Are Piling Up in Cities

A subsidy-fueled boom helped build China into an electric-car giant but left weed-infested lots across the nation brimming with unwanted battery-powered vehicles.

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2023-china-ev-graveyards/

 

Indeed EV logic is questionable at its very core. Logic from a activist..Now that is rare territory.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Eyes Wide Open

[turbguy + 1,427]

1 hour ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

There is some merit towards your thoughts. Yet at the same time guilt by association does open a plausible discussion does it not? 

To be continued.

What do you consider my "association"?

And, what pray tell, is my "guilt"?

Edited September 18, 2023 by turbguy

[TailingsPond + 502]

50 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Logic you say? A world class automaker losing billions on a heavily government subsidized EV line of of autos...and after 6 yrs of development and countless billions of wealth lost! And they still can't produce EV jalopies?

EV jalopies

https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2023-china-ev-graveyards/

Indeed EV logic is questionable at its very core. Logic from a activist..Now that is rare territory.

Clearly they, and many other people, can produce "EV jalopies."

*hint* You don't have excess supply if nobody can produce them.

What they can't do is make a competitive product versus more established companies like Tesla.

On the subject, it remains impossible to defend a statement like "every one wants more gas."

 

Edited September 18, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,550]

42 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

On the subject, it remains impossible to defend a statement like "every one wants more gas."

Ya Don't Say...Our democracy Demands It.

Battle Over Electric Vehicles Is Central to Auto Strike

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/16/business/electric-vehicles-uaw-gm-ford-stellantis.html

Edited September 18, 2023 by Eyes Wide Open

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

8 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

Short term versus long-term vision. Oil is a military strategic resource so of course it has some special "value."  War is not desirable, nor are all the guns, bombs and gas needed to fuel it.

You say things like "everyone wants more gas" when that is clearly wrong in reality.  You lose whatever shed of credibility you have every time you make illogical statements like that.

Do you deny the existence of EV companies?

Biden & Co. are now asking for increased oil demand, so that is the reality. You are dreaming of a future which will never come. Oil demand is at an all-time high and will continue to grow.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-11/global-oil-demand-hits-record-and-prices-may-climb-iea-says#xj4y7vzkg

"Consumption reaches 103 million barrels a day for first time"

Edited September 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

Here is the ultimate political chicanery, a government blaming oil companies for responding to government requests for more oil, and further misrepresenting the climate science.

Really, how inane can political emissions become? This is political pollution.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/California-Governor-Slams-Big-Oil-For-Lying-About-Climate-Change.html

Furthermore, California imports oil continually, making a mockery of claims that California is against fossil fuels. They have to take a good look in the  mirror before pointing fingers at anyone else.

https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-petroleum-market/foreign-sources-crude-oil-imports

Foreign Sources of Crude Oil Imports to California

Foreign Sources of Crude Oil Imports to California 2022

CountryThousands of BarrelsPercentage

IRAQ68,401 22.3%

Foreign Sources of Crude Oil Imports to California 2022

ECUADOR51,974 16.9%

SAUDI ARABIA50,242 16.4%

BRAZIL41,358 13.5%

COLOMBIA21,512 7.0%

GUYANA19,202 6.3%

MEXICO14,257 4.6%

CANADA12,538 4.1%

KAZAKHSTAN6,08 22.0%

Other21,370 7.0%

Grand Total306,936 100.0%

Edited September 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 502]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Here is the ultimate political chicanery, a government blaming oil companies for responding to government requests for more oil, and further misrepresenting the climate science.

 

Maybe your personal viewpoint on climate science. 

Meanwhile, in reality, thousands march against fossil fuels.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/tens-of-thousands-march-to-kick-off-climate-summit-demanding-end-to-warming-causing-fossil-fuels/ar-AA1gR711?rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=bce340d300a0424d8171776849d871fd&ei=26

So it remains impossible to defend a statement like "every one wants more gas."

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

Maybe your personal viewpoint on climate science. 

Meanwhile, in reality, thousands march against fossil fuels.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/topstories/tens-of-thousands-march-to-kick-off-climate-summit-demanding-end-to-warming-causing-fossil-fuels/ar-AA1gR711?rc=1&ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=bce340d300a0424d8171776849d871fd&ei=26

So it remains impossible to defend a statement like "every one wants more gas."

If California is against oil, why does California import so much oil? It looks like even California likes gas in their tanks. Just as I claimed above. Even you like gas in your tank, right? I guess everyone likes gas.

If you are willing to pay your hard-earned money on gas, you must like it. No one is forcing you to buy gas, that is your own choice.

The Governor of California uses a lot of gas, he should include himself in the lawsuit as a defendant.

And the government climate scientists themselves are blaming the political class for misrepresenting the actual science.

Here is an interesting interview with one of former President Obama's climate researchers, who demonstrates how the basic climate science undertaken and presented to the IPCC has been actively misrepresented in the media and has fueled widespread panic among young Americans. Unconscionable. The IPCC issues reports which have been grossly misreported in the media, which makes for great news value but bad public knowledge.

I never believed that the scientists themselves believed the nonsense which is reported, but scientists are human beings and they worry that public funding for their work may depend on them taking politically acceptable positions. So there is very little protest from the scientists who remain silent while their work is grossly misunderstood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l90FpjPGLBE

Edited September 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 502]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

If California is against oil, why does California import so much oil? It looks like even California likes gas in their tanks. Just as I claimed above. Even you like gas in your tank, right? I guess everyone likes gas.

People do lots of things they know are bad for them like eat junk food, drink booze, smoke, drugs.

Do not confuse product consumption rates as a measure of "goodness." 

Everyone likes bacon but you probably agree it isn't very healthy or a sustainable food energy source.

[notsonice + 1,098]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

If California is against oil, why does California import so much oil? It looks like even California likes gas in their tanks. Just as I claimed above. Even you like gas in your tank, right? I guess everyone likes gas.

If you are willing to pay your hard-earned money on gas, you must like it. No one is forcing you to buy gas, that is your own choice.

The Governor of California uses a lot of gas, he should include himself in the lawsuit as a defendant.

And the government climate scientists themselves are blaming the political class for misrepresenting the actual science.

Here is an interesting interview with one of former President Obama's climate researchers, who demonstrates how the basic climate science undertaken and presented to the IPCC has been actively misrepresented in the media and has fueled widespread panic among young Americans. Unconscionable. The IPCC issues reports which have been grossly misreported in the media, which makes for great news value but bad public knowledge.

I never believed that the scientists themselves believed the nonsense which is reported, but scientists are human beings and they worry that public funding for their work may depend on them taking politically acceptable positions. So there is very little protest from the scientists who remain silent while their work is grossly misunderstood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l90FpjPGLBE

and yet demand in California is decreasing

all due to EV's

Thanks to Sleepy Joe.....Oil has peaked and is now in a terminal decline ...across the US
 

California Consumption

Californians consumed 13.82 billion gallons of finished gasoline in 2021, or 38 million gallons per day. Finished gasoline is base gasoline with ethanol added, blended at 10 percent. The demand for base gasoline, gasoline without the added ethanol, was 12.4 billion gallons during 2021.

The demand for gasoline has declined since 2017 due to more people driving electric vehicles and the societal shift with more employees working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

If California is against oil, why does California import so much oil? It looks like even California likes gas in their tanks. Just as I claimed above. Even you like gas in your tank, right? I guess everyone likes gas.

If you are willing to pay your hard-earned money on gas, you must like it. No one is forcing you to buy gas, that is your own choice.

The Governor of California uses a lot of gas, he should include himself in the lawsuit as a defendant.

And the government climate scientists themselves are blaming the political class for misrepresenting the actual science.

Here is an interesting interview with one of former President Obama's climate researchers, who demonstrates how the basic climate science undertaken and presented to the IPCC has been actively misrepresented in the media and has fueled widespread panic among young Americans. Unconscionable. The IPCC issues reports which have been grossly misreported in the media, which makes for great news value but bad public knowledge.

I never believed that the scientists themselves believed the nonsense which is reported, but scientists are human beings and they worry that public funding for their work may depend on them taking politically acceptable positions. So there is very little protest from the scientists who remain silent while their work is grossly misunderstood.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l90FpjPGLBE

California imports so much foreign oil because of the Jones Act. Since you don't know what the Jones Act is here is a primer: Under the Jones Act, foreign carriers and crews are banned from domestic water routes. Cabotage from one U.S. port to another is restricted to U.S.-built, -crewed and -flagged vessels. The requirement was a protectionist economic strategy designed to assist America’s shipyards and maritime fleet.

There are very few US made tankers so we have to import from other countries. As to California oil consumption, it has dropped 26% since its peak in 1989:

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

1 hour ago, TailingsPond said:

People do lots of things they know are bad for them like eat junk food, drink booze, smoke, drugs.

Do not confuse product consumption rates as a measure of "goodness." 

Everyone likes bacon but you probably agree it isn't very healthy or a sustainable food energy source.

People consume many addictive substances. Gas is different, You consume gas not because you are addicted to gas, but because it is good for you.

When was the last time you filled your gas tank?

Edited September 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

8 minutes ago, Jay McKinsey said:

California imports so much foreign oil because of the Jones Act. Since you don't know what the Jones Act is here is a primer: Under the Jones Act, foreign carriers and crews are banned from domestic water routes. Cabotage from one U.S. port to another is restricted to U.S.-built, -crewed and -flagged vessels. The requirement was a protectionist economic strategy designed to assist America’s shipyards and maritime fleet.

There are very few US made tankers so we have to import from other countries. As to California oil consumption, it has dropped 26% since its peak in 1989:

California still imports huge amounts of oil and gasoline, so the Governor of California should be suing himself for allowing this trade in  oil.

Or, perhaps he could sue the President for requesting huge increases in oil for Americans, or he could sue the Department of Energy for promoting the use of oil in American automobiles, or he could sue the UN for allowing the expansion of oil usage in underdeveloped countries, or he could sue his own transportation assistants for booking flights for his travel or he could sue his personal lawyers for being stupid enough to listen to him.

Edited September 18, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

1 minute ago, Ecocharger said:

California still imports huge amounts of oil and gasoline, so the Governor of California should be suing himself for allowing this trade in  oil.

Or, perhaps he could sue the President for requesting huge increases in oil for Americans, or he could sue the Department of Energy for promoting the use of oil in American automobiles, or he could sue the UN for allowing the expansion of oil usage in underdeveloped countries, or he could sue his own transportation assistants for booking flights for his travel or he could sue his personal lawyers for being silly enough to listen to him.

import or domestic is irrelevant. What matters is that consumption is decreasing at an accelerating rate.

[bloodman33 + 20]

CA is suing the oil companies that lied!   They are suing Ecocharger for lying.  Liars!  There will be accountability!   

[AlBub + 14]

On 9/16/2023 at 8:47 PM, turbguy said:

Just a Little More Info on Texas:

https://www.ferc.gov/media/february-2021-cold-weather-outages-texas-and-south-central-united-states-ferc-nerc-and

A confluence of two causes, both triggered by cold weather, led to the Event, part of a recurring pattern for the last ten years. First, generating units unprepared for cold weather failed in large numbers. Second, in the wake of massive natural gas production declines, and to a lesser extent, declines in natural gas processing, the natural gas fuel supply struggled to meet both residential heating load and generating unit demand for natural gas, exacerbated by the increasing reliance by generating units on natural gas.  Natural gas pipeline capacity is for the most part designed, certificated and constructed to accommodate firm transportation commitments, while many natural gas-fired generating units rely on non-firm commodity and/or pipeline transportation contracts.

ERCOT, MISO and SPP all knew from weather forecasts and warnings issued by NOAA and other meteorologists beginning in early February that an arctic cold front was expected. All three issued cold weather preparation notices to their generation and transmission operators based on when the cold weather was expected to reach their respective footprints: ERCOT and SPP on February 8, and MISO on February 9. Temperatures began to drop below freezing in ERCOT and SPP on February 8, but low temperatures dropped even lower during the week of February 14, reaching their nadir on February 15 and 16. Daily low temperatures for February 15 in the Event Area were as much as 40 to 50 degrees lower than average daily minimum temperatures for February 15. In addition to the arctic air, the cold front brought periods of freezing precipitation and snow to large parts of Texas and the South Central U.S., starting February 10, and extending into the week of February 14, 2021.

Unplanned outages of natural gas wellheads due to freeze-related issues, loss of power and facility shut-ins to prevent imminent freezing issues, beginning on approximately February 7, as well as unplanned outages of natural gas gathering and processing facilities, resulted in a decline of natural gas available for supply and transportation to many natural gas-fired generating units in the South Central U.S. Once natural gas supply outages began at the wellhead, they rippled throughout the natural gas and electric infrastructure, causing processing outages and reductions, pipeline declarations of Operational Flow Order (OFO) and force majeure, and outages and derates of natural gas-fired generating units.

U.S. natural gas production in February 2021 experienced the largest monthly decline on record.22 Between February 8 and 17, the total natural gas production in the U.S. Lower 48 fell by 28 percent. In the Event Area, Texas, Oklahoma, and Louisiana gas production at its lowest point of February 17 declined by an estimated 21 Bcf/d, exceeding a 50 percent decline when compared to average production in January 2021. Average production declines in those three states constituted over 80 percent of the total production declines across the lower 48 states during the period from February 15-20 when compared to average production in January 2021. Most producing regions of the U.S. saw a sharp decline and recovery associated with temperature—when temperatures fell, regional production dropped, and as temperatures rose after the Event, regional production recovered, ultimately to pre-Event levels by late February.

During the week of February 7, ERCOT and SPP experienced rising load, as well as increasing generating unit outages, primarily caused by wind turbine blade freezing as a result of freezing precipitation, and natural gas fuel supply issues. Although ERCOT and SPP issued several alerts, they did not have to take any emergency actions because enough generation remained online to meet load. 

But the week of February 14 brought far colder weather, and ERCOT, SPP and MISO all faced emergency conditions simultaneously. Temperatures dropped as low as six degrees in Austin, eight degrees in Dallas and ten degrees in Houston. Unplanned generating unit outages and derates in ERCOT escalated sharply in the late-night hours of February 14 into the early morning hours of February 15, and ERCOT set an all-time winter peak record for system load of 69,871 MW at 8:00 p.m. on February 14. The combination of high load and increasing unplanned generating unit outages caused ERCOT’s Physical Responsive Capability to drop below acceptable levels, and at 12:15 a.m., it issued the first stage of an Energy Emergency Alert (EEA),  EEA 1, which allowed it to deploy demand response resources.

Beginning in the early hours of February 15 at approximately 12:18 a.m., the ERCOT Interconnection frequency, which measures the balance of supply and demand on the BES and is thus a critical indicator of BES reliability status, began to fall below the normal band level. At first ERCOT was able to recover its frequency to normal levels through deployment of load management measures, but it continued to suffer generating unit outages and needed to order its first 1,000 MW of load shed at 1:20 a.m. As system frequency continued to fall, ERCOT BA operators ordered an additional 1,000 MW of load shed, but generating units continued to fail and frequency declined to the point that ERCOT operators had only nine minutes to prevent approximately 17,000 MW of generating units from tripping due to underfrequency relays, which could potentially cause a complete blackout of the ERCOT Interconnection. ERCOT system frequency eventually bottomed out, and finally rose above the generator trip level after remaining below for over four minutes.

However, unplanned generating outages continued, and ERCOT system operators continued to shed firm load to balance demand against the massive generating unit losses. For over two days, including generating units already on planned or unplanned outages when the Event began as well as unplanned outages that began during the Event, ERCOT averaged 34,000 MW of generation outages (based on expected capacity). To balance ERCOT’s load against those staggering generation losses, ERCOT operators continued to order firm load shed, lasting nearly three consecutive days, and peaking at 20,000 MW by 7 p.m. on February 15.

 

 

Despite all the reasons that you I have mentioned, the final straw was the EPA. ERCOT requested that they be allowed to run generators at full capacity and the EPA said "N0!" The EPA has the final responsibility for the deaths and structural damage caused by the outage. It was a political disaster, just like many others.

[Jay McKinsey + 1,489]

13 minutes ago, AlBub said:

Despite all the reasons that you I have mentioned, the final straw was the EPA. ERCOT requested that they be allowed to run generators at full capacity and the EPA said "N0!" The EPA has the final responsibility for the deaths and structural damage caused by the outage. It was a political disaster, just like many others.

Another lie.

Several Facebook users shared screenshots of a Twitter thread that starts off with a tweet suggesting Abbot made the request to the Biden administration. Abbott "declared an emergency and asked President Biden for an EPA waiver to allow power generation facilities to operate at full capacity until the emergency passed."

But that request came from the Energy Reliability Council of Texas, not Abbott, and the U.S. Department of Energy approved it.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/02/25/fact-check-ercot-not-gov-abbott-sought-bypass-emission-limits/6803971002/

 

[turbguy + 1,427]

5 hours ago, AlBub said:

Despite all the reasons that you I have mentioned, the final straw was the EPA. ERCOT requested that they be allowed to run generators at full capacity and the EPA said "N0!" The EPA has the final responsibility for the deaths and structural damage caused by the outage. It was a political disaster, just like many others.

"Try again" comes to mind.  I followed almost every step in that event.  Have you??

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/biden-administration-approved-texas-power-request-contrary-to-false-claim/

BTW, the EPA permitted it again, about a week ago, too.

Why would the EPA want any Americans to suffer?

Seems that Texan politicians don't mind it, based on their past decisions/non-decisions.

Edited September 19, 2023 by turbguy

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

10 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said:

import or domestic is irrelevant. What matters is that consumption is decreasing at an accelerating rate.

What matters is that California is big on oil, and the Governor is whacky to not blame himself for putting his hands into the oil pot.

[Rob Plant + 2,652]

17 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

So it remains impossible to defend a statement like "every one wants more gas."

If you want more gas, eat beans and fart in a can!

[AlBub + 14]

19 hours ago, notsonice said:

and yet demand in California is decreasing

all due to EV's

Thanks to Sleepy Joe.....Oil has peaked and is now in a terminal decline ...across the US
 

California Consumption

Californians consumed 13.82 billion gallons of finished gasoline in 2021, or 38 million gallons per day. Finished gasoline is base gasoline with ethanol added, blended at 10 percent. The demand for base gasoline, gasoline without the added ethanol, was 12.4 billion gallons during 2021.

The demand for gasoline has declined since 2017 due to more people driving electric vehicles and the societal shift with more employees working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Destroying economies has proven throughout the years as perhaps the greatest way to decrease energy usage. Biden has been very effective this way!

[AlBub + 14]

14 hours ago, turbguy said:

"Try again" comes to mind.  I followed almost every step in that event.  Have you??

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/biden-administration-approved-texas-power-request-contrary-to-false-claim/

BTW, the EPA permitted it again, about a week ago, too.

Why would the EPA want any Americans to suffer?

Seems that Texan politicians don't mind it, based on their past decisions/non-decisions.

Every event in that case effected me. Maybe you were following too close and got a lot of smoke in your face. EPA did turn them down when we needed the extra capacity to save lives and billions of dollars in infrastructure damage. The damage, by the way, is damage to the environment because of all the resources needed to repair it. 

The biggest enemy to the environment is environmentalists, especially political ones.

[Ecocharger + 1,384]

6 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

If you want more gas, eat beans and fart in a can!

Only 1.25% of Europeans by last count do not use gas in their automobiles. That includes you.

Edited September 19, 2023 by Ecocharger