The Fossil Fuel Industry Misinformation Campaign

[surada]

Earth, the only planet in the Universe that does not have abiotic hydrocarbons?

If it’s from fossils how do some “fossil fuel” fields refill?

If Methane on Earth only comes from organic processes, how does Titan, or any other planet or Moon have methane?

Oil is not in puddles.. it's in rocks like sandstone and limestone. It seeps.

 

[Crick]

Big oil has funded emission reduction studies at major universities for decades and zillions of dollars.

Zillions of dollars? How much is that? Government and journalistic investigations have uncovered hundreds of millions of dollars being spent ANNUALLY on their anti-mitigation PR campaigns.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Oil is not in puddles.. it's in rocks like sandstone and limestone. It seeps.

Because of dead dinosaurs or because of an abiotic process?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Earth, the only planet in the Universe that does not have abiotic hydrocarbons?

Wrong again.

Rewriting the textbook on fossil fuels: New technologies help unravel nature's methane recipes

Experts say scientific understanding of deep hydrocarbons has been transformed, with new insights gained into the sources of energy that could have catalyzed and nurtured Earth's earliest forms of life.

phys.org

But you knew that already. So why do you just keep trolling with one non sequitur after another? How much do you get paid for each stupid question?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The deniers here constantly accuse the world's climate scientists of ALL being involved in a massive and decades-long hoat to push global warming in order to 1) Get rich 2) Remain employed 3) Gain control over the population 4) Destroy western civilization. Unfortunately for them, they have ZERO evidence to support those claims.

Deniers here have also constantly IGNORED the possibility that the fossil fuel industry, seeing global warming mitigation measures as an existential threat, might make efforts to slow the acceptance of the science and the measures required to combat this problem. Unfortunately for them, there is a wealth of evidence to prove that this is precisely what they have done and that all deniers have served admirably as the industry's "useful idiots".

Oil companies discourage climate action, study says

Harvard researchers have turned a spotlight on the sometimes subtle, yet effective, strategies employed by oil companies to foster doubt and delay action on climate change.

news.harvard.edu

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep00046.7.pdf

Exxon’s Climate Denial History: A Timeline

A review of Exxon's knowledge and subsequent denial of climate change.

www.greenpeace.org

https://www.npr.org/2023/09/14/1199570023/exxon-climate-change-fossil-fuels-global-warming-oil-gas

The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing

Since the 1980s, fossil fuel firms have run ads touting climate denial messages – many of which they’d now like us to forget. Here’s our visual guide

www.theguardian.com

Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago

A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation

www.scientificamerican.com

1. "Denier" is a cult word, not a scientific term
2. The OP correctly stated the goals of the AGWCult
3. If "fossil Fuels" are an "existential threat" why is China, the world leading user of "Fossil fuels" always exempt from the AGWCult hysterical nonsense?

 

[Blues Man]

I am not a big advocate for BEV vehicles. I have stated here repeatedly that I think we should have gone with hydrogen fuel cells and hydrogen combustion but, of course, we already possess an extensive electrical infrastructure. The claim that EVs or wind turbines or solar panels are responsible for more GHG emissions during their construction than they will offset is FALSE. The use of EVs and wind turbines and solar panels reduces our GHG emissions and, of course, as more and more of our electrical power is produced by non-emitting sources, the time for offset gets shorter and shorter and shorter.

There is no law of nature that tells us the the economy cannot be fully supported by non-emitting technologies and implying that there is, is a lie. With fusion power on the horizon, this problem will disappear.

Fusion power has been "on the horizon" for how many decades now?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Wrong again.

Rewriting the textbook on fossil fuels: New technologies help unravel nature's methane recipes

Experts say scientific understanding of deep hydrocarbons has been transformed, with new insights gained into the sources of energy that could have catalyzed and nurtured Earth's earliest forms of life.

phys.org

But you knew that already. So why do you just keep trolling with one non sequitur after another? How much do you get paid for each stupid question?

I'm trying to educate you and I don't give up easily

"Methane (CH4) is abundant on the giant planets—Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune—where it was the product of chemical processing of primordial solar nebula material. On Earth, though, methane is special. Of the 1,750 parts per billion by volume (ppbv) of methane in Earth’s atmosphere, 90 to 95 percent is biological in origin."

The Mystery of Methane on Mars and Titan

Hydrocarbons from biology is less than a rounding error, hydrocarbons from chemical processes are abundant

 

[Crick]

Fusion power has been "on the horizon" for how many decades now?

Have you not seen the recent new stories?

US nuclear-fusion lab enters new era: achieving ‘ignition’ over and over

Researchers at the National Ignition Facility are consistently creating reactions that make more energy than they consume.

www.nature.com

 

[Blues Man]

Have you not seen the recent new stories?

US nuclear-fusion lab enters new era: achieving ‘ignition’ over and over

Researchers at the National Ignition Facility are consistently creating reactions that make more energy than they consume.

www.nature.com

Yeah I won't hold my breath it will take a hundred years to get the regulations in placed

 

[Crick]

Yeah I won't hold my breath it will take a hundred years to get the regulations in placed

No it won't. This is WAY safer than fission plants.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I'm trying to educate you and I don't give up easily

In other words, you lie for Koch Industries and pretend to be stupid. So how much are you being paid for doing that here? Still waiting..

 

[Grumblenuts]

Have you not seen the recent new stories?

US nuclear-fusion lab enters new era: achieving ‘ignition’ over and over

Researchers at the National Ignition Facility are consistently creating reactions that make more energy than they consume.

www.nature.com

In December 2022, after more than a decade of effort and frustration, scientists at the US National Ignition Facility (NIF) announced that they had set a world record by producing a fusion reaction that released more energy than it consumed — a phenomenon known as ignition. They have now proved that the feat was no accident by replicating it again and again, and the administration of US President Joe Biden is looking to build on this success by establishing a trio of US research centres to help advance the science.

And more will cost you only $365/yr.. CHEAP!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

In other words, you lie for Koch Industries and pretend to be stupid. So how much are you being paid for doing that here? Still waiting..

"Methane (CH4) is abundant on the giant planets—Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune—where it was the product of chemical processing of primordial solar nebula material. On Earth, though, methane is special. Of the 1,750 parts per billion by volume (ppbv) of methane in Earth’s atmosphere, 90 to 95 percent is biological in origin."

The Mystery of Methane on Mars and Titan

Hydrocarbons from biology is less than a rounding error, hydrocarbons from chemical processes are abundant

 

[Blues Man]

No it won't. This is WAY safer than fission plants.

Not necessarily.

Besides it's extremely limited based on tritium supplies. And at $30000 for a gram of tritium, how viable will fusion power be? The irony here is the best way to produce tritium in in fission reactors

Molten salt reactors run on some of the most abundant elements in the ground

 

[Flash]

The deniers here constantly accuse the world's climate scientists of ALL being involved in a massive and decades-long hoat to push global warming in order to 1) Get rich 2) Remain employed 3) Gain control over the population 4) Destroy western civilization. Unfortunately for them, they have ZERO evidence to support those claims.

Deniers here have also constantly IGNORED the possibility that the fossil fuel industry, seeing global warming mitigation measures as an existential threat, might make efforts to slow the acceptance of the science and the measures required to combat this problem. Unfortunately for them, there is a wealth of evidence to prove that this is precisely what they have done and that all deniers have served admirably as the industry's "useful idiots".

Oil companies discourage climate action, study says

Harvard researchers have turned a spotlight on the sometimes subtle, yet effective, strategies employed by oil companies to foster doubt and delay action on climate change.

news.harvard.edu

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep00046.7.pdf

Exxon’s Climate Denial History: A Timeline

A review of Exxon's knowledge and subsequent denial of climate change.

www.greenpeace.org

https://www.npr.org/2023/09/14/1199570023/exxon-climate-change-fossil-fuels-global-warming-oil-gas

The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing

Since the 1980s, fossil fuel firms have run ads touting climate denial messages – many of which they’d now like us to forget. Here’s our visual guide

www.theguardian.com

Exxon Knew about Climate Change Almost 40 Years Ago

A new investigation shows the oil company understood the science before it became a public issue and spent millions to promote misinformation

www.scientificamerican.com

Crick with her Environmental Wacko bullshit again. LOL!

 

[jc456]

Crick with her Environmental Wacko bullshit again. LOL!

she's unsure of what it is she's solving to fix! Kind of odd in fact.

 

[Flash]

she's unsure of what it is she's solving to fix! Kind of odd in fact.

Ms. Crick is confused about a lot of things. This thread is just another example.

 

[Crick]

Not necessarily.

Besides it's extremely limited based on tritium supplies. And at $30000 for a gram of tritium, how viable will fusion power be? The irony here is the best way to produce tritium in in fission reactors

Molten salt reactors run on some of the most abundant elements in the ground

I personally have no problem with well made fission reactors, but...

ask and you shall receive

Tritium: Changing lead into gold

In order to produce energy from the fusion of light atoms, nature offers a dozen of possible combinations. Only one is accessible in the current state of techn[...]

www.iter.org

 

[Blues Man]

I personally have no problem with well made fission reactors, but...

ask and you shall receive

Like I said made in fission reactors

 

[Crick]

Like I said made in fission reactors

Did you not look at the article to which I linked? Tritium can be made in fusion reactors simply by adding lithium to the chamber walls.

Tritium: Changing lead into gold

In order to produce energy from the fusion of light atoms, nature offers a dozen of possible combinations. Only one is accessible in the current state of techn[...]

www.iter.org