Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.

A $3.5-million Alberta government public inquiry into alleged foreign-funded anti-energy campaigns has posted commissioned studies that experts say are based on junk climate-denial science, bizarre conspiracy theories and oil-industry propaganda.


"If you read any of this stuff, it really strays into Marxism and conspiracy theory and George Soros and Bill Gates," said Andrew Leach, an energy and environmental economist at the University of Alberta.


"It is astounding to me."


Recently, the Public Inquiry Into Funding of Anti-Alberta Campaigns posted on its website that it had invited 47 people or organizations to apply for standing as a "participant for commentary" in the inquiry.


The 11 who applied and were granted standing received a package of materials to review, including several reports commissioned at the request of inquiry commissioner Steve Allan, a Calgary forensic accountant with close ties to the government of Premier Jason Kenney.

<snip>


Another commissioned report, by historian Tammy Nemeth, claims that a "transnational progressive movement" is attempting to overthrow the "modern western industrial capitalist society" by infiltrating institutions such as the United Nations and the World Bank, as well as university departments and corporations.


"The foot soldiers, the shock troops, of the larger movement," Nemeth wrote, are environmental non-government organizations, "or watermelons, as James Delingpole has coined — green on the outside, red (socialist) on the inside."


Nemeth recycled a number of old arguments that natural cycles are responsible for rising CO2 levels and increased global temperatures — claims that have been debunked in multiple peer-reviewed scientific studies.


Allan paid Nemeth, a home-school teacher in England, nearly $28,000 for the report.


Energy In Depth, an offshoot campaign of the Independent Petroleum Association of America, was paid $50,000 US for a third commissioned report, titled "Foreign Funding Targeting Canada's Energy Sector."


<snip>

Full article at:
Critics denounce 'climate-change denialism' reports commissioned by Alberta inquiry
 
  • Informative
Reactions: dhrivnak
New graphs completing 2020:

2020 shares global mean temperature record with 2016.

2020---annual-graph.png
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: SmartElectric
Nice article/graphics from the NYT.

Electric vehicles are better for the climate than gas-powered cars, but many Americans are still reluctant to buy them. One reason: The larger upfront cost.

New data published Thursday shows that despite the higher sticker price, electric cars may actually save drivers money in the long-run.

To reach this conclusion, a team at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology calculated both the carbon dioxide emissions and full lifetime cost — including purchase price, maintenance and fuel — for nearly every new car model on the market.

They found electric cars were easily more climate friendly than gas-burning ones. Over a lifetime, they were often cheaper, too...

...Take the Tesla Model 3, the most popular electric car in the United States. The M.I.T. team estimated the lifetime cost of the most basic model as comparable to a Nissan Altima that sells for $11,000 less upfront. (That’s even though Tesla’s federal tax incentive for electric vehicles has ended.)


Electric Cars Are Better for the Planet – and Often Your Budget, Too - The New York Times
 
Our new TransSec wants millions of electric cars in the US. This is good, he already accomplished his job before even getting hired without doing anything at all. 2018 was the first million EVs and it's 2021. (But not one of those EVs are his). He doesn't have to lift a finger except to grab a handful of taxes.

EEI Celebrates 1 Million Electric Vehicles on U.S. Roads

He probably had all-electric cars in mind, which just reached 1 million in August.

Plug-in electric vehicles in the United States - Wikipedia

But they will probably nerf EVs like they have been.

What does "nerf EVs" mean? Are you concerned there will be no real improved support for EVs and emission reductions in the next 2 or 4 years?

Unless the Senate runs into filibuster problems, I think it is clear that there will be substantial improvements. I don't quite understand the point of your posts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JRP3
He probably had all-electric cars in mind, which just reached 1 million in August.

Plug-in electric vehicles in the United States - Wikipedia



What does "nerf EVs" mean? Are you concerned there will be no real improved support for EVs and emission reductions in the next 2 or 4 years?

Unless the Senate runs into filibuster problems, I think it is clear that there will be substantial improvements. I don't quite understand the point of your posts.

I live in California, the King of EV's and Solar. My EVs and Solar have reduced government support now. It is at its lowest levels since 2012. That is called: Derating, detuning, attenuating, reducing, nerfing, canning, wrecking, minimizing, etc. This was done mainly at the state level, but also at the Fed level. IIRC the bill to extend EV tax credits was shot down by the HR, which is still in power today.

It has no bearing on my finances. I just scoff at statements indicating they are improving green programs while doing the opposite. Speeches don't count for much to me.
 
I live in California, the King of EV's and Solar. My EVs and Solar have reduced government support now. It is at its lowest levels since 2012. That is called: Derating, detuning, attenuating, reducing, nerfing, canning, wrecking, minimizing, etc. This was done mainly at the state level, but also at the Fed level. IIRC the bill to extend EV tax credits was shot down by the HR, which is still in power today.

It has no bearing on my finances. I just scoff at statements indicating they are improving green programs while doing the opposite. Speeches don't count for much to me.

I didn't follow the development over the years in detail. However as far as I can tell, for a Tesla Model 3, today you get a "california clean fuel reward" of $1,500, plus a "clean vehicle rebate" of $2,000. Together $3,500. (although one of those has an income limit of $150k for single filers).

A few years ago, the last number I remember, was just a $2,500 tax rebate. So actually an improvement of $1,000, if my quick check is correct.

Regarding the bill to extend EV tax credits beyond 200k units, you are probably referring to H.R. 6274 which it seems was before the midterm 2018 majority change. I would guess it wasn't re-introduced afterwards because it was expected to get shot down in the Senate, but so far I couldn't find any specific info about that.

EDIT: Correction, H.R.6274 (not 6275), in June 2018, was the attempt by Democrats to extend EV credits beyond the limit of 200k cars per manufacturer (the House still had a Republican majority).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Big Earl
This is an article from 2020 by Plug In America. It says there was strong bipartisan support for extending the EV credit (in 2019/2020), but it was left out of the proposed legislative work because Trump would veto it.

Washington fails to extend the federal EV tax credit; what's next? -
Despite a flurry of activity in December and thousands of emails and phone calls to Congressional offices (thank you!), an extension of the federal EV tax credit was left out of the final federal spending bill. According to Senator Debbie Stabenow, it was left out due to “extreme resistance from the president,” despite support from both sides of Congress. While the tax credit has been phasing out for Tesla and GM vehicles, it is still in place for automakers that have yet to sell 200,000 vehicles.
 
My to-do list would be pretty easy to follow:

0. Close the concentration camps and repatriate families immediately
1. Cancel every executive order the disgraced, impeached fascist ever signed.
2. Cancel every fossil fuel project that was green-lighted
3. Green-light every clean energy project that was obstructed
4. Set the social cost of carbon at $100 per ton

Turn to page #2, day #2
 
Last edited:
So reading this made me sad and frustrated all over again:

Many Overheated Forests May Soon Release More Carbon Than They Absorb - Inside Climate News

But then I just read this and made me feel like I could help in another way besides driving an EV and using solar/wind:

The Radical Case for Growing Huge Swaths of Bamboo in North America - Inside Climate News

I can't believe I'm just now finding out that bamboo can sequester carbon....time to plant some in my backyard!
Plus you can make flooring, textiles, toilet paper, even silica supplements from bamboo. Bamboo (and hemp) for the win.
 
So reading this made me sad and frustrated all over again:

Many Overheated Forests May Soon Release More Carbon Than They Absorb - Inside Climate News

But then I just read this and made me feel like I could help in another way besides driving an EV and using solar/wind:

The Radical Case for Growing Huge Swaths of Bamboo in North America - Inside Climate News

I can't believe I'm just now finding out that bamboo can sequester carbon....time to plant some in my backyard!
Just be careful with the bamboo. It is very aggressive and will take over everything.