Aside from not true in every relevant scenario, it’s not that simple at all, and it paints a false dilemma. It’s not gas vs coal, it‘s fossil vs renewable, it‘s continuing to sponsor oil companies vs saving the planet. Using gas to transition to renewables is a bad idea for several very good logical reasons listed in the link I posted as well as in previous post. It’s not “better”, it’s at best less bad. We don’t have the time and luxury anymore to choose for better instead of actual solutions that do not just help to meet self-imposed theoretical intermediate milestones that will still end up not being enough.
In contrast, something (using gas to transition to renewables) is not a good or even logical reason to favor that same thing. A reason it is favored is purely economical. Was. With the high gas prices and lowering prices of renewables it makes it an even worse idea than it was.
www.theguardian.com
Show me a more pragmatic or realistic scenario, we only appear to have bad choices while we transition. We are going to be using fossilized carbon for decades to come, even in the developed world, so harm reduction is logical. Stop using coal first, then gasoline and most diesel and finally NG. It takes time for alternatives to be developed and EV batteries are rapidly getting there, we also need a green new grid built on the back of the old one. It will take decades to transition Europe to heat pumps.(replying here, I posted in wrong thread)
same article for completeness sake.
Greenpeace to take European Commission to court over controversial gas and nuclear greenwashing - Greenpeace European Unit
Greenpeace will take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice over the inclusion of fossil gas and nuclear energy in the EU’s Taxonomywww.greenpeace.org
Aside from not true in every relevant scenario, it’s not that simple at all, and it paints a false dilemma. It’s not gas vs coal, it‘s fossil vs renewable, it‘s continuing to sponsor oil companies vs saving the planet. Using gas to transition to renewables is a bad idea for several very good logical reasons listed in the link I posted as well as in previous post. It’s not “better”, it’s at best less bad. We don’t have the time and luxury anymore to choose for better instead of actual solutions that do not just help to meet self-imposed theoretical intermediate milestones that will still end up not being enough.
In contrast, something (using gas to transition to renewables) is not a good or even logical reason to favor that same thing. A reason it is favored is purely economical. Was. With the high gas prices and lowering prices of renewables it makes it an even worse idea than it was.
World urged to slash gas use by a third to avoid climate disaster
‘Gas is the new coal’, says Climate Analytics report that finds it the fastest growing source of carbon dioxide emissions
Natural Gas: The Myth of Transition Fuels
There are good reasons why we should focus on renewables and why investment in transition fuels, such as natural gas, impedes progress.www.greenamerica.org
Or continue to support Shell:
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) | Shell Global
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is natural gas that has been cooled to a liquid state. Learn about Shell’s growing international LNG business.www.shell.com
Or any of the others pushing the bad idea of replacing fossil fuel with one of their other fossil fuel products.
View attachment 5258155
One thing that throws the issue into stark relief is that we haven’t rendered war obsolete and are unlikely to do so, barring the worst case. If nobody else, the military will need large, concentrated sources of power that can be turned to 100% on, on demand. Nuclear fits the bill, and fusion is the likely successor. Unless we find something just this side of magic, like tapping vacuum energy.(replying here, I posted in wrong thread)
same article for completeness sake.
Greenpeace to take European Commission to court over controversial gas and nuclear greenwashing - Greenpeace European Unit
Greenpeace will take the European Commission to the European Court of Justice over the inclusion of fossil gas and nuclear energy in the EU’s Taxonomy
Aside from not true in every relevant scenario, it’s not that simple at all, and it paints a false dilemma. It’s not gas vs coal, it‘s fossil vs renewable, it‘s continuing to sponsor oil companies vs saving the planet. Using gas to transition to renewables is a bad idea for several very good logical reasons listed in the link I posted as well as in previous post. It’s not “better”, it’s at best less bad. We don’t have the time and luxury anymore to choose for better instead of actual solutions that do not just help to meet self-imposed theoretical intermediate milestones that will still end up not being enough.
In contrast, something (using gas to transition to renewables) is not a good or even logical reason to favor that same thing. A reason it is favored is purely economical. Was. With the high gas prices and lowering prices of renewables it makes it an even worse idea than it was.
World urged to slash gas use by a third to avoid climate disaster
‘Gas is the new coal’, says Climate Analytics report that finds it the fastest growing source of carbon dioxide emissions
Natural Gas: The Myth of Transition Fuels
There are good reasons why we should focus on renewables and why investment in transition fuels, such as natural gas, impedes progress.
Or continue to support Shell:
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) | Shell Global
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is natural gas that has been cooled to a liquid state. Learn about Shell’s growing international LNG business.
Or any of the others pushing the bad idea of replacing fossil fuel with one of their other fossil fuel products.
View attachment 5258155
elements.visualcapitalist.com
www.nature.com
www.businessinsider.com
town cars?Town cars and commuting from the burbs to the city for now, road trips will be out for most in North America until range and charging improve. The situation will most likely be very different for range and charging in 5 years, but for now EVs will suit the needs of tens of millions of shorter range commuters who can top up from home overnight.
A couple took an electric car on a 1,500 mile road trip. They had to stop 12 times and forgo heat due to their range anxiety.
While they were never afraid of getting stranded, they said the trip required more planning with their Kia EV6 than it would have with a traditional car.
Biden Administration Bets $74 Million on 'Enhanced' Geothermal Power
A Department of Energy grant aims to cut the cost of new geothermal systems that generate electricity from heat that is miles undergroundwww.scientificamerican.com
Many of this nation’s top industrialists are into renewables! Ask their fourth wives.THIS! Why they don't build huge geothermal plants around the Yellowstone super volcano for instance and tap into all that carbon free energy at least. Start rebuilding the grid to make it immune to EMP attack.
Plenty of other places to tap into this free form of energy too.
Need to stop the oil lobby from interfering and if they had any care for the planet they would be investing in renewables themselves then they could keep their profits up without killing the planet.
EVs are being introduced and battery prices are still high, so early adaptors tend to be more affluent, and high end EVs are the first offerings. As I said before, a small cheap EV with enough range that can be topped up from home will be the Model T of EVs. Most Americans can no longer afford a new car according to a recent article I saw, and everybody seems to be piling on the high-end EV market for now.
Still, the town car was such a land yacht they discontinued it.
I mean something other than 60 and 70s marketing terms! I mean an actual town car, used to drive around town or from the burbs into the city for work!
Something you don't drive cross country in, but the idea is to top it up at night and drive to work the next day. I figure for ease of charging it at home will put some size constraints on such EVs
must be a Canadian regional term then.I mean something other than 60 and 70s marketing terms! I mean an actual town car, used to drive around town or from the burbs into the city for work!