GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

On 12/14/2024 at 1:59 AM, Ecocharger said:

It's over and done.

" Tesla deliveries are below expectations, Volvo has moved back its 2030 100% EV timeline, General Motors abandoned its 1-million-vehicle 2025 sales goal, and Ford has shifted some EV production back to internal combustion vehicles, the note reported.

Meanwhile, EV startups are struggling. California-based Fisker declared bankruptcy, while luxury EV makers Rivian and Lucid, whose vehicles draw rave reviews from the automotive media, have seen shares drop precipitously this year as the companies fall short of sales goals.

Look at this guy.  "Over and done"  too funny and so, so wrong.

What has happened in reality?  Tesla way, way up - meanwhile Ford is failing.  It is the complete opposite of what this so-called economist predicted. 

Hide in shame.

 

Edited December 17 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

On 12/13/2024 at 11:42 AM, Ecocharger said:

Oil prices are beginning to soar again as a sense of reality breaks into the oil markets.

How is that soaring going?  Are you going to argue down is up again? I clearly posted the price trend-lines.

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

It appears that Justin Trudeau is in serious political meltdown mode again, with the socialist party threatening to force him to resign and bring down his government.

That would be good news for the Alberta government, whose ownership and direction of the oil industry puts them as natural opponents of Trudeau and his misguided climate agitation.

The government of Alberta owns 81% of the province's oil and gas rights.

https://www.alberta.ca/royalties#:~:text=Find out more about Alberta's royalty frameworks.&text=On behalf of Albertans%2C the,province - that's called a royalty.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Alberta-Defies-Trudeaus-Emissions-Cap-Plan.html

"Alberta believes the federal emissions cap will force production cuts and hurt the economy.

The province argues the cap is unconstitutional and plans to fight its enforcement.

Alberta's actions include declaring emissions data provincial property and potentially blocking federal officials from oil and gas sites."

"The actions in the motion, if approved, would ensure that no provincial entity participates in the enforcement or implementation of the federal cap. It would also ban entry to any individual, including any federal official or contractor, into oil and gas sites unless these are specifically licensed to enter by the Government of Alberta.

In one of the more controversial actions, the motion would declare all information on emissions as proprietary information exclusively owned by the Government of Alberta, and mandate that all emissions data be reported and disclosed at the province’s discretion."

 

Edited December 17 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

It appears that Justin Trudeau is in serious political meltdown mode again, with the socialist party threatening to force him to resign and bring down his government.

It appears you once again have no clue. Alberta has barked for many years, nothing much happens. Oh other than the Trudeau government actually got the trans-mountain pipeline approved and built and they own the pipeline.

While I hate pollution, Alberta oil does bring me money so either way I win.

Address your other posts, where Ford was going to win, EV's lose, and oil soars.  Run and hide or explain your clearly wrong posts.

 

 

Edited December 17 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

"The actions in the motion, if approved, would ensure that no provincial entity participates in the enforcement or implementation of the federal cap. It would also ban entry to any individual, including any federal official or contractor, into oil and gas sites unless these are specifically licensed to enter by the Government of Alberta.

 

I guarantee you that will not be approved. It is in direct contradiction of numerous federal acts.  For example the Fisheries Act and the Canadian Environmental Protection Act clearly grant federal agents to do law enforcement on oil sites.  They also have the duty to assist the inspection.  If only someone here was an expert on this subject...

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-14/FullText.html

Powers of Fishery Officers and Fishery Guardians

Marginal note:Inspection

• 49 (1) Subject to subsection (2), for the purpose of ensuring compliance with this Act and the regulations, a fishery officer or fishery guardian may enter and inspect any place, including any premises, vessel or vehicle, in which the officer or guardian believes on reasonable grounds there is any work or undertaking or any fish or other thing in respect of which this Act or the regulations apply and may

  • (a) open any container that the officer or guardian believes on reasonable grounds contains any fish or other thing in respect of which this Act or the regulations apply;

  • (b) examine any fish or other thing that the officer or guardian finds and take samples of it;

  • (c) conduct any tests or analyses and take any measurements; and

  • (d) require any person to produce for examination or copying any records, books of account or other documents that the officer or guardian believes on reasonable grounds contain information that is relevant to the administration of this Act or the regulations.

• Marginal note:Operation of data processing systems and copying equipment

  (1.1) In carrying out an inspection of a place under subsection (1), a fishery officer or fishery guardian may,

  • (a) use or cause to be used any data processing system at the place to examine any data contained in or available to the data processing system;

  • (b) reproduce any record or cause it to be reproduced from the data in the form of a print-out or other intelligible output and remove the print-out or other output for examination or copying; and

  • (c) use or cause to be used any copying equipment at the place to make copies of any record, book of account or other document.

• Marginal note:Duty to assist

  (1.2) The owner or person in charge of a place that is inspected by a fishery officer or fishery guardian under subsection (1) and every person found in the place shall

  • (a) give the officer or guardian all reasonable assistance to enable the officer or guardian to carry out the inspection and exercise any power conferred by this section; and

  • (b) provide the officer or guardian with any information relevant to the administration of this Act or the regulations that the officer or guardian may reasonably require.

 

 

Edited December 17 by TailingsPond

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,257]

14 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

While I hate pollution, Alberta oil does bring me money so either way I win.

That statement tells us who you really are, a liar with no moral code. You have negated all your previous posts by that one statement!!! Sad....

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

5 hours ago, Old-Ruffneck said:

That statement tells us who you really are, a liar with no moral code. You have negated all your previous posts by that one statement!!! Sad....

No, it does not.  Liking money and the environment are not mutually exclusive.  I just pointed out that even if I get something I don't want (pollution) that pain is mitigated by getting something I do like ($).

Imagine saying someone can't both like salads and pizza.  Enjoying a pizza doesn't mean you can't think the salad is the better choice. Oil is the pizza, greasy, unhealthy, but enjoyable.  We should consume more green energy.

It is moot anyways as that garbage he posted will never materialize.  The feds won't be bossed around that much by the provinces.  Some do not understand that the individual provinces do not have anywhere near the power of a individual state. 

Edited December 18 by TailingsPond

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/EPA-Approves-California-Ban-Of-Fossil-Fueled-Cars-Starting-2035.html

 

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

Coal is hot and getting hotter, with production and demand ramping up to all-time highs.

EVs and coal in China are like bread and butter, you cannot have one without the other.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Worlds-Coal-Demand-at-Record-High-in-2024-IEA-Says.html

This year, coal demand is on track to increase by 1% from 2023 to 8.77 billion tons, a record high, the IEA said today.

"While coal demand continues to decline in the EU and the U.S. – although at slower paces than in 2023, China and India are set to see in 2024 another year of record-high coal consumption. China is on track for a 1% rise to 4.9 billion tons, and India’s coal demand is poised to increase by more than 5% to 1.3 billion tons—a level that only China has reached previously."

"Although the share of coal in China’s electricity generation has been declining in recent years with the renewables boom, Chinese coal power generation and demand remains strong. Coal still accounts for about 60% of China’s power generation, despite a surge in hydropower earlier this year after abundant rainfall."

 

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Coal is hot and getting hotter, with production and demand ramping up to all-time highs.

EVs and coal in China are like bread and butter, you cannot have one without the other.

https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Worlds-Coal-Demand-at-Record-High-in-2024-IEA-Says.html

This year, coal demand is on track to increase by 1% from 2023 to 8.77 billion tons, a record high, the IEA said today.

"While coal demand continues to decline in the EU and the U.S. – although at slower paces than in 2023, China and India are set to see in 2024 another year of record-high coal consumption. China is on track for a 1% rise to 4.9 billion tons

1% per year growth is pretty dismal.  You called that "hot and getting hotter?"

Tesla is +74.6% over the last year.

 

 

Edited December 19 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

Trudeau is now toast, just a matter of when Parliament next meets.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn54elwep72o

"Polls indicate that if a Canadian federal election were to be held today, the official opposition Conservative Party would be handed a decisive victory."

The socialist party has indicated that they will pull the plug on Trudeau at the first opportunity.

"On Monday, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh for the first time called on Trudeau to resign, making the Liberal hold on power look increasingly shaky.

The NDP's House leader told broadcaster the CBC that its members would vote in favour of a no-confidence motion if the prime minister was still leader in the New Year."

Edited December 19 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

8 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

Trudeau is now toast, just a matter of when Parliament next meets.

This effects you how?  A non-confidence is highly unlikely. Waste of money when the election is not far away anyways.

Trudeau has won many elections and has served for a long time (started in 2015)... perhaps too long. I do not fear change, so I have no problem with a change in leadership.  Is P.P. my ideal replacement choice? no.

Edited December 19 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

The outgoing U.S. administration in Washington is hysterically attempting to install programs which will be immediately scrapped by the Trump administration...there could hardly be a greater disagreement by government experts over any single issue.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Biden-Pledges-61-Emissions-Cut-by-2035-Ahead-of-Trump-Presidency.html

"During the campaign, President-elect Trump has repeatedly slammed the “crazy” EV mandate of President Joe Biden, whose Administration has sought to support EV sales with incentives and mandates for federal agencies to use electric vehicles.

Under Biden, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has also introduced new air pollution limits to encourage automakers to produce and seek to sell more EVs.

The American Petroleum Institute (API) sued the EPA over the vehicle emission standards, with Senior Vice President and General Counsel Ryan Meyers saying that “EPA has exceeded its congressional authority with this regulation that will eliminate most new gas cars and traditional hybrids from the U.S. market in less than a decade.”

Meanwhile, EV sales haven’t surged, as hoped, and automakers, including the biggest in the U.S., have slowed down the rollout of new EV models or bet on more hybrids."

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

54 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The outgoing U.S. administration in Washington is hysterically attempting to install programs which will be immediately scrapped by the Trump administration...there could hardly be a greater disagreement by government experts over any single issue.

"During the campaign, President-elect Trump has repeatedly slammed the “crazy” EV mandate of President Joe Biden, whose Administration has sought to support EV sales with incentives and mandates for federal agencies to use electric vehicles.

 

You continue to fail to acknowledge the present elect is in bed with Musk.

You are lucky that Musk wants EV subsidies scrapped so he can destroy the EV competition. Do not kid yourself the future is electric.

California got approval for fossil fuel elimination in and the feds will have a tough time taking that away.

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

Meanwhile, EV sales haven’t surged, as hoped, and automakers, including the biggest in the U.S., have slowed down the rollout of new EV models or bet on more hybrids."

The largest automaker in the US only sells electric.

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

		Ford Quarterly income: Net income 892M Tesla Quarterly income: Net income 2.17B Only the failed economist would think the company with less than half the income is on the better track.  He has repeated praised Ford decisions, and look at the results. Ford -19% past year, Tesla +69.5% past year. You can only ignore your mistakes so long dude. How is that surging oil prices you prediction you made years ago?  Yep we are approaching the new year again and yet your predictions ($100 oil) are worse than ever!

Edited December 19 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

Coal is hot and going higher in terms of demand and production.

Coal is needed to produce electricity.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/12/18/coal-demand-to-continue-hitting-records-through-2027-iea-says/

(International Energy Agency)"

As can be seen above, the IEA keeps shifting its expected demand schedule for coal to a higher level, no surprise.

"Global demand for coal is set to hit fresh records every year through at least 2027, International Energy Agency data show, overturning a previous estimate that it peaked last year and highlighting the challenges to limiting emissions that cause global warming. 

The latest forecast from the IEA sees demand for coal rising to nearly 8.9 billion tons by 2027, about 1% higher than 2024 levels. That overwrites last year’s estimate that coal demand would begin a steady decline this decade. The reality could surpass the current estimate, as demand has consistently eclipsed the IEA’s predictions in recent years. 

That’s a blow to world leaders who pronounced the end of coal was in sight at climate talks in Glasgow three years ago. Even as developed nations use less of the fossil fuel, ever increasing demand elsewhere, particularly in China, means coal remains a cheap source of energy..."

 

Edited December 20 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

5 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

 

Coal is needed to produce electricity.

You know that coal is not needed to produce electricity.

Keep up the entertainment failed economist. 

Those 1% per year gains in coal is fantastic... not.  One percent per year is less than inflation.

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/12/18/coal-demand-to-continue-hitting-records-through-2027-iea-says/

"1% higher than 2024 levels."

Edited December 21 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

 

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/12/18/coal-demand-to-continue-hitting-records-through-2027-iea-says/

(International Energy Agency)"

As can be seen above, the IEA keeps shifting its expected demand schedule for coal to a higher level, no surprise.

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

5 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

 

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/investing/2024/12/18/coal-demand-to-continue-hitting-records-through-2027-iea-says/

As can be seen above, the IEA keeps shifting its expected demand schedule for coal to a higher level, no surprise.

Yeah up to a whopping 1% per year growth.

Can you read?   You need to stop focusing on "expectations" of demand and focus on current reality.

How are those "soaring oil prices" you stated was occurring?

 

[Ecocharger + 1,486]

The radical climate agitators in California persist in getting it wrong. Here is more nonsense from the misguided liberal intelligentsia.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Gas-Prices/Debunking-the-Myth-of-Oil-Refiner-Price-Gouging-in-California.html

"California's high gasoline prices are primarily driven by state taxes and fees, not excessive profits by oil refiners.

Data from the California Energy Commission reveals that oil refiners often operate on razor-thin or even negative profit margins.

Policymakers should focus on reforming California's tax and regulatory structure to address high gas prices instead of targeting oil companies."

"Since California began reporting net margins in June 2023, the data paints a very different picture than that promoted by supporters of anti-gouging measures. Over the past 11 months that have been reported, refiners posted a positive net margin in only six months. The average net profit margin from June 2023 to April 2024 was just $0.09 per gallon — hardly the excessive profits that critics claim."

"Californians pay roughly $1.40 per gallon in taxes and fees — the highest in the nation. Here’s the breakdown:

• State Excise Tax: 57.9 cents per gallon (as of July 2024)
• Federal Excise Tax: 18.4 cents per gallon
• Cap-and-Trade Program: 23 cents per gallon
• Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS): 18 cents per gallon
• Underground Storage Tank Fee: 2 cents per gallon
• Sales Tax: ~3.7% of the retail price

These taxes and regulatory fees combined with California’s stringent fuel standards — which mandate unique summer and winter gasoline blends — drive up prices far more than the refiners’ net margins."

Edited Saturday at 11:50 PM by Ecocharger

[surrept33 + 612]

On 12/19/2024 at 2:56 PM, TailingsPond said:

You continue to fail to acknowledge the present elect is in bed with Musk.

You are lucky that Musk wants EV subsidies scrapped so he can destroy the EV competition. Do not kid yourself the future is electric.

California got approval for fossil fuel elimination in and the feds will have a tough time taking that away.

yes President Musk will just "reform government" so that all potential competitors of Tesla die off.

 

 

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

16 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

"California's high gasoline prices are primarily driven by state taxes and fees, not excessive profits by oil refiners.

Data from the California Energy Commission reveals that oil refiners often operate on razor-thin or even negative profit margins.

Policymakers should focus on reforming California's tax and regulatory structure to address high gas prices instead of targeting oil companies."

 

They want high gas prices - It is by design - they will not change their regulatory structure to help refiners.  In fact they plan on completely eliminating gasoline usage - the opposite of helping refineries. 

You carry on supporting the dying gasoline industry with "negative profit margins" Mr economist.  Personally I will take massive profit margins and cleaner air.

I will shed no tears for those failing refineries - anyone who works there should be looking for a new job.  Only a moron would think the California gasoline industry is going to turn around. Like you quoted it has already failed with "negative profits."

[turbguy + 1,556]

On 12/20/2024 at 5:45 PM, TailingsPond said:

You know that coal is not needed to produce electricity.

True, you can produce electricity via other means that using coal.  Even rubbing a balloon against wool works for that.

HOWEVER...

At present, the world cannot produce sufficient electric power (energy) to satisfy demand without using coal, even in the USA. That's the current reality.

Electric power is perhaps the most addictive "stuff" I can think of. 

The withdrawal symptoms are really severe.

Edited Monday at 05:53 PM by turbguy

[TailingsPond + 1,013]

On 12/22/2024 at 12:39 PM, turbguy said:

True, you can produce electricity via other means that using coal.  Even rubbing a balloon against wool works for that.

HOWEVER...

At present, the world cannot produce sufficient electric power (energy) to satisfy demand without using coal, even in the USA. That's the current reality.

Electric power is perhaps the most addictive "stuff" I can think of. 

The withdrawal symptoms are really severe.

I agree some fossil fuels may still be needed but not coal.  Coal power plants can be retrofitted to natural gas and there is plenty of gas.

Never say something "cannot" be done - it is just a matter of will.

You also fail to understand that you do not need to satisfy demand.  Sometimes the crying toddler shouldn't get anymore ice cream.