So we are so anxious to replace gas with electric and it may not be necessary!

[FA_Q2]

Meanwhile back in reality....

View attachment 777181


Increased population means that more land will be used for housing, farming, consumption of raw materials such as lumber, cattle, etc... That translates into less foliage that would eventually be converted into petroleum.

?

Considering it takes, generally, over a million years for living matter to be converted naturally into oil, current and future land usage is not even remotely relevant to future oil production or the total available reserves we can tap into. All that matters is the current conversion rate, how much of that is accessible and if we are exceeding that rate. Most of this is unknown though.

 

[FA_Q2]

I'm not about to go out and buy an electric car right now. But if people that could buy one, they'd be helping the US become energy independent. Especially if their power comes from solar, wind or nuclear energy.

Not sure why republicans are so against EV's and renewables. America has always been in the top 5, if not #1 at developing new technology. We used to pride ourselves on it. Now it gets bashed for political reasons.

They are against it because the democrats are for it.

What each party does and does not support becomes less connected with reality or ideology by the day and is becoming more about the opposite of what the other side wants. What each side claims as the basis of their ideology has little to do with what they specifically support anymore.

 

[YoursTruly]

They are against it because the democrats are for it.

What each party does and does not support becomes less connected with reality or ideology by the day and is becoming more about the opposite of what the other side wants. What each side claims as the basis of their ideology has little to do with what they specifically support anymore.

 

[justoffal]

?

Considering it takes, generally, over a million years for living matter to be converted naturally into oil, current and future land usage is not even remotely relevant to future oil production or the total available reserves we can tap into. All that matters is the current conversion rate, how much of that is accessible and if we are exceeding that rate. Most of this is unknown though.

What do you think about the theory that petroleum might actually be a deep earth tectonic product?

 

[Billiejeens]

Physicist, meteorologist testify that the climate agenda is ‘disastrous’ for America​

By Kevin Stocklin
8/12/2023

Two Princeton, MIT Scientists Say EPA Climate Regulations Based on a ‘Hoax’

Two prominent climate scientists have taken on the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new rules to cut CO2 emissions in electricity generation, arguing in testimony that the regulations “will be disastrous for the country, for no scientifically justifiable reason.”

Citing extensive data to support their case, William Happer, professor emeritus in physics at Princeton University, and Richard Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), argued that the claims used by the EPA to justify the new regulations are not based on scientific facts but rather political opinions and speculative models that have consistently proven to be wrong.

“The unscientific method of analysis, relying on consensus, peer review, government opinion, models that do not work, cherry-picking data and omitting voluminous contradictory data, is commonly employed in these studies and by the EPA in the Proposed Rule,” Mr. Happer and Mr. Lindzen stated. “None of the studies provides scientific knowledge, and thus none provides any scientific support for the Proposed Rule.”

“All of the models that predict catastrophic global warming fail the key test of the scientific method: they grossly overpredict the warming versus actual data,” they stated. “The scientific method proves there is no risk that fossil fuels and carbon dioxide will cause catastrophic warming and extreme weather.”

 

[FA_Q2]

What do you think about the theory that petroleum might actually be a deep earth tectonic product?

You mean as a biproduct of the process without organic material? The only information I can find on it at first glance seem more like pseudoscience than actual research. There is no doubt that plate tectonics plays a role but anything of actual substance necessitates organic material to be present and that does make sense.



Do you have a link with something substantive and peer reviewed?


I do think that people generally have a hard time conceptualizing just how much life has existed on this planet in the last 3 billion years. Every single ‘prediction’ made about peak oil in the past has been woefully incorrect. There is absolutely no reason to think that any new statements on running out are remotely accurate.

 

[Billiejeens]

You mean as a biproduct of the process without organic material? The only information I can find on it at first glance seem more like pseudoscience than actual research. There is no doubt that plate tectonics plays a role but anything of actual substance necessitates organic material to be present and that does make sense.



Do you have a link with something substantive and peer reviewed?


I do think that people generally have a hard time conceptualizing just how much life has existed on this planet in the last 3 billion years. Every single ‘prediction’ made about peak oil in the past has been woefully incorrect. There is absolutely no reason to think that any new statements on running out are remotely accurate.

I giggle at "peer reviewed"
Every time.

 

[FA_Q2]

I giggle at "peer reviewed"
Every time.

...?

I must have missed something.

 

[Billiejeens]

...?

I must have missed something.

Prolly