Trump picks climate denier to head EPA transition

[rolosrevenge]

A person could say that they wanted Hillary to lose because the idea of the former First Lady going on to become president is extremely shady by all standards. So much so that it's only happened 4 times before, in Panama, Argentina (twice), and Bangladesh. Not really the sort of countries people admire for their democracy or lack of corruption.

But back on topic. Vote with your dollars. People can have all of the access to fossil fuels they want, but if it's too expensive because renewable energy is cheaper, they won't get it. So buy solar panels and EVs and sign up for your utilities renewable program. Also states can set energy mandates so feel free to use those too. And if you've got extra money and truly feel global warming is the greatest threat to humanity. You can spend your extra money buying EVs for people who can't currently afford them.

 

[tomas]

Unfortunately EVs without solar do little re global warming. It would be more useful to buy people solar systems.

Hate when people say "if you think it is important" as if it is a choice or a preference.

Let me put it this way: do you think it is important to control nuclear weapons? What's the difference between that and climate change? Both will curtail human life if unchecked. Fact.

 

[Gregkeys]

EV's and Solar are quickly reaching critical mass, I'd even argue we are already there as a result of the work Elon has done.

it does NOT matter what the government does at this point (UNLESS Trump flat out bans EV's and solar which he will not do) Tesla's are selling like hotcakes and that's what matters!

When given the choice between a $35k EV and a $35k ICE i'm guessing most will choose the EV because no one wants to pay for gas

When given the choice between a $35k shingle roof and a $40k solar roof (totally made up numbers btw) I'm guessing most people will choose the solar roof because no one wants to pay a utility bill.

The point being the incentives to get the industry off the ground have already accomplished what they needed to accomplish, the market is here, its proven and its going to be unstoppable.

 

[kort677]

Don't see the point. Or are you going to claim that Trump isn't also an unethical deceitful liar? Just. Try.

trump was never in public service, never violated any sort of trust that is part of being an elected or appointed government servant. there is no sort of equivalency in this picture.

 

[DFibRL8R]

As important as federal programs have been in getting solar and EV's off the ground, there is plenty of good work yet to be done at the State level. My state (Virginia) has swung from solidly red to blue over the past decade. The Statehouse is still pretty red but the Governor, Lt Governor, AG are not. Still we have cheap gas, cheap fossil fuel-derived electricity, active efforts to block Tesla in the State, and essentially no State incentives for Solar or EVs. I believe we can make progress at the State and local level despite a hostile EPA head or President.

 

[qwk]

A person could say that they wanted Hillary to lose because the idea of the former First Lady going on to become president is extremely shady by all standards. So much so that it's only happened 4 times before, in Panama, Argentina (twice), and Bangladesh. Not really the sort of countries people admire for their democracy or lack of corruption.

But back on topic. Vote with your dollars. People can have all of the access to fossil fuels they want, but if it's too expensive because renewable energy is cheaper, they won't get it. So buy solar panels and EVs and sign up for your utilities renewable program. Also states can set energy mandates so feel free to use those too. And if you've got extra money and truly feel global warming is the greatest threat to humanity. You can spend your extra money buying EVs for people who can't currently afford them.

+1000

Voting with your dollars makes all of the difference. Obama has done nothing for EV's but provide lip service. Other than compliance cars(which is another liberal abortion), there are only the Leaf, and Tesla for a choice(and Nissan is going back to hybrids soon). 8 years and the choice has not changed. Promises...

As far as government charging mandates? There is that awesome government plan, and Blink infrastructure. Oh wait....

When one goes by results rather than promises and talk, the government programs and mandates area giant f-uupps.

 

[kort677]

As important as federal programs have been in getting solar and EV's off the ground, there is plenty of good work yet to be done at the State level. My state (Virginia) has swung from solidly red to blue over the past decade. The Statehouse is still pretty red but the Governor, Lt Governor, AG are not. Still we have cheap gas, cheap electricity, active efforts to block Tesla in the State, and essentially no State incentives for Solar or EVs. I believe we can make progress at the State and local level despite a hostile EPA head or President.

so you're advocating higher energy costs?

 

[qwk]

trump was never in public service, never violated any sort of trust that is part of being an elected or appointed government servant. there is no sort of equivalency in this picture.

Yep. Just the fact that he is not a career politician is enough for me.

 

[cmorgan]

That's where this is incredibly frustrating. I can't 'tone it down' without watering it down to the point that it's meaningless. Someone REALLY wants a Camero. They can't afford a Tesla and a Volt isn't a Camero. Am I honest with them or do I let them dig the hole deeper?

I wish more people could face reality and see our addiction to fools fuel for what it is. A necessary evil that's largely no longer necessary. If we're not honest with that reality we're screwed and it really won't matter. That's not an opinion... it's cold hard reality. And as people pitch the idea of uniting the county after a divisive election.... it's really, REALLY hard to accept a difference of opinion when you start with a difference of FACT.

It's far easier to be critical of someone than it is to actually participate in solving the issue. Trying to force someone to do what you want is offensive to many people, including myself. On the other hand if you were to implement some product, technological improvement, process etc that would help people reduce their energy consumption, use less fossil fuels etc, that would be far far more effective. It turns out that that is also much more difficult to do.

On the environmental side it doesn't help that environmental predictions have largely not come true. Its not difficult to find predictions from 10 years ago that suggest some variation of "in 10 years xxxx", and then see that it didn't occur. People become desensitized to the extremism and then the entire message is ineffective. I can't stand listening to the proclamations of impending destruction, whether it be by climate or by election outcome, without tuning out.

 

[tomas]

1 let's stop baiting each other. 2 let's stop taking the bait. This election has been litigated. Those who do not support Trump: now he is a reality so we have to move on from here with positive action on issues we are passionate about. Those who support Trump: your guy won, his big challenge now is to govern for all the people and bring the doubters into his fold, you are not helping by picking or engaging in fights.

This thread is about climate change and what a Trump administration might do to address it or compound it. Let's stay OT.

 

[tomas]

On the environmental side it doesn't help that environmental predictions have largely not come true. Its not difficult to find predictions from 10 years ago that suggest some variation of "in 10 years xxxx", and then see that it didn't occur. People become desensitized to the extremism and then the entire message is ineffective. I can't stand listening to the proclamations of impending destruction, whether it be by climate or by election outcome, without tuning out.

Wait just a sec. you need to read up. Ice shelf melting, global temp rising, ocean acidification increasing... all at or above predicted levels. This is measurable, emperical fact.

I do hate it when people blame specific incidents on global warming, like a specific hurricane. That is harder to prove and does dilute the message. But there is ample evidence of how we are destroying the planet. If I provide you references, will you take the time to read them, or are you going to ignore facts?

 

[tomas]

so you're advocating higher energy costs?

This is the problem. If you understand exactly how we are destroying the planet, then you realize we need to transition to sustainable energy and that will have a cost. If you do not yet understand the problem, then you are aghast that anyone would suggest paying more for clean energy.

 

[Krugerrand]

trump was never in public service, never violated any sort of trust that is part of being an elected or appointed government servant. there is no sort of equivalency in this picture.

So, you think that makes him an ethical, honest truthspeaker? You're really going with that?

 

[nwdiver]

So for all of you that think public support isn't needed to kick the fools fuel habit....

- Tesla would have been fine without the ZEV credits from California?
- Tesla would have been fine without the $500M DOE loan?
- Sure, they got a loan from Daimler... but why do you think Daimler was interested in EVs?
- NORWAY.... you think the free market got EVs to 30% of new sales???
- The $7500 tax credit
- CAFE standards
- Remember that whole VW fiasco that now has them scrambling to make EVs...
- Wind Production tax credit... good bye.
- Solar tax credit
- Veteran solar training
- The Clean Power Plan...

Do I think killing all these programs will kill EVs and renewables? Probably not... but it's sure going to slow things down at a time that we need to be doing MORE... not LESS. But... that's ok... I'm sure future generations will look around at their AGW ravaged planet and think... wow, things sure are terrible... but at least our 45th president was a racist, misogynistic, homophobic sociopath instead of an old lady that used the wrong email.

AND... even worse... there's a good chance KXL will be brought back to life... DAPL will almost certainly be built... $2/gal gas isn't going to help the addiction....

GM announces plans to retool for fewer cars and more trucks... I'm sure it's just a coincidence that this announcement is made the day after America votes that climate change is a hoax. Too bad physics isn't a 'democracy'...

 

[apacheguy]

Unfortunately EVs without solar do little re global warming. It would be more useful to buy people solar systems.

In California, very little of our power mix comes from coal and over 20% comes from renewables. EVs without solar are substantially cleaner than any comparable ICE on the road.

 

[cmorgan]

Wait just a sec. you need to read up. Ice shelf melting, global temp rising, ocean acidification increasing... all at or above predicted levels. This is measurable, emperical fact.

I do hate it when people blame specific incidents on global warming, like a specific hurricane. That is harder to prove and does dilute the message. But there is ample evidence of how we are destroying the planet. If I provide you references, will you take the time to read them, or are you going to ignore facts?

I can see there is evidence for environmental changes, I'm not here to debate the science here. I'm referring to credibility around the movement. Comments like:

2006: Al Gore Does Sundance
With the quote of:

And politicians and corporations have been ignoring the issue for decades, to the point that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return, Gore said.

It has been 10 years. It seems like we haven't taken drastic measures. Have we reached the point of no return?

 

[TheTalkingMule]

so you're advocating higher energy costs?

Since when does solar mean higher energy costs? States such as Virginia and my home state of Pennsylvania actively protect the more expensive and less efficient status quo because their state Houses are filled with natural gas puppets.

Is it cheaper to build out new solar or methane capacity?

Pennsylvania now has an excellent governor in place who will protect net metering until we hit a certain amount of solar output. There are thousands of homeowners fighting through red tape and utility obstruction trying to install additional capacity at no cost to the ratepayers of Pennsylvania. The idea that residential solar isn't cheaper(even under full net metering) is absurd.

This obstruction and disinformation does not come without cost to us all. Solar installs are probably averaging $3.25/W or more in Pennsylvania as sales costs and other ancillary costs of fighting obstruction pile on the installers, while every other rational country is installing at $2/W. Who pays that $1.25 in extra cost? All of us pay it through 30% tax credits and the net metering required to offset the unnecessarily inflated install costs.

Even with all this unnecessary cost loaded on top, solar is still cheaper.

 

[tomas]

It has been 10 years. It seems like we haven't taken drastic measures. Have we reached the point of no return?

Sigh, yes, we have advocates who preach and harm their own case. Problem is you won't know when we reached the point until far too late. It is science that is not up for debate. We know the particulate measures and we know the inevitable effects, just not exact timing/sequence. Add to that the fact that the effects are exaggerated and more frequent occurrences of otherwise 'normal' natural phenomena (hurricane, typhoon, flooding, drought). Makes it hard to convince people who don't want to do the math. Nobody has yet figured out the compelling argument that hooks in non-science people.

All the more reason I would hope more advocates speak up, improve the communications, and develop more sustainable products like Tesla's that reduce emissions and create further advocates.

 

[cmorgan]

Sigh, yes, we have advocates who preach and harm their own case. Problem is you won't know when we reached the point until far too late. It is science that is not up for debate. We know the particulate measures and we know the inevitable effects, just not exact timing/sequence. Add to that the fact that the effects are exaggerated and more frequent occurrences of otherwise 'normal' natural phenomena (hurricane, typhoon, flooding, drought). Makes it hard to convince people who don't want to do the math. Nobody has yet figured out the compelling argument that hooks in non-science people.

All the more reason I would hope more advocates speak up, improve the communications, and develop more sustainable products like Tesla's that reduce emissions and create further advocates.

What about what he says is "scientific proof" and what isn't? Blanket doomsday statements make people less likely to believe you in the future, or believe anything you have to say, and this guy is effectively the leader of the movement, he won a freaking Nobel prize for climate change work: The Nobel Peace Prize 2007

Recommendations for climate change people that want to get the average person to listen:

- Live the lifestyle you want others to live. If that means no oil then by all means, show us how awesome it is.
- Make predictions that are accurate and come true.
- Enough with the doomsday predictions. We know the ones from 40 years ago didn't come true, we know many of the ones from 20 years ago didn't etc.

And in a few years you'll probably find that a lot more people are listening.

 

[techmaven]

So for all of you that think public support isn't needed to kick the fools fuel habit....

- Tesla would have been fine without the ZEV credits from California?
- Tesla would have been fine without the $500M DOE loan?

... etc.

We are fortunate that Tesla had those things and has gotten to this point. It is after those things have happened and looking forward, we still have reason to hope.

First, the rest of the world is waking up to global climate change and has increased incentives.
2nd, in places like Australia, Hawaii, and so forth, the levelized cost of energy for solar and solar+battery already make sense without incentives
3rd, it is possible that a Trump presidency brings forth enough economic growth that Tesla does well anyways.
4th, it is unlikely that the new Congress can affect any tax credit changes in 2017, and dubious about radical changes in 2018 so the primary federal level credit would still be in effect
5th, the state incentives including CARB ZEV credits are still in effect, so GM/Ford/others won't like meeting those demands without the federal tax credit

Matter of fact, if they sunset the federal alternative fuels tax credit in 2019, that is actually a net positive for Tesla. And if California still buys energy storage, and various utilities buy it because it makes economic sense, then the role of incentives is largely already accomplished. Yes, it would be even better if more incentives were in place. But not absolutely necessary for Tesla anymore in the 2018+ timeframe. Matter of fact, it makes it harder on their competition to follow Tesla. Then, in 2018 or 2020, if the winds change again, Tesla would actually be in stronger position relative to its competitors.

However, this is definitely a set back for fighting climate change, even if Tesla prospers. But there was this middling malaise of trudging the U.S. towards fighting climate change. Maybe we can come back with a vengeance next time.