Don isn't going to like this unintended consequence of his war with Iran.

Coal is a cheap and reliable source of energy. We shouldn’t stop using it. Solar and wind are expensive and unreliable.
Not cheap when you factor in the problems caused by climate change.

AI Overview

In 2025, climate-related disasters caused over $115 billion in damages in the U.S. alone, with global insured losses projected to hit $145 billion. The year saw 23 separate billion-dollar disasters in the US, driven by extreme events like the $61 billion Los Angeles wildfires, making it one of the costliest years on record.
 
Trump fans and supporters are a fascinating group. Trump wouldn't give his fans the time of day as he lives for himself. But bad men often have ardent followers which is why history is so full of evil.


^^ that’s some serious cope. A rant about how everyone is “stupid” because they don’t follow your batshit crazy Agenda.
 
Hahab trump is NATO, the nato commender was appointed by Trump and reports to Trump

You are cluess

Article 51

The effort is not just Denmark; the Danish military is conducting patrols with NATO allies, including Germany, France, Sweden, and Norway.
 
Renewables are not a “scam”.

The bulk of the electricity you buy from Canada is “renewables”. Almost all of our electricity is produced by hydro electric, nuclear or wind/solar in Ontario.

We also have some of the cheapest electrical power in North America.

We closed the last of our coal fired plants in the 1990’s. Air quality in Southern Ontario immediately improved.

Hospital admissions/emergency visits for asthma and breathing problems droppped like a stone.

But keep believing Republican lies about renewables.
As usual, you’re full of shit.

The vast majority of Canada’s energy comes from hydropower and nuclear. Hydropower is good but is limited to regions near such water sources. Much of America can’t do that.

Only 5 to 9% of Canada’s energy comes from solar and wind.
 
Coal is a cheap and reliable source of energy. We shouldn’t stop using it. Solar and wind are expensive and unreliable.

AI Overview

Burning coal severely impacts public health by releasing toxic pollutants (mercury, sulfur dioxide, fine particles) that cause premature death, cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and asthma. These pollutants aggravate chronic diseases, cause developmental damage to children, and damage nervous systems, with particularly high mortality impacts in regions surrounding coal-fired power plants.
 
AI Overview

Burning coal severely impacts public health by releasing toxic pollutants (mercury, sulfur dioxide, fine particles) that cause premature death, cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and asthma. These pollutants aggravate chronic diseases, cause developmental damage to children, and damage nervous systems, with particularly high mortality impacts in regions surrounding coal-fired power plants.
There are clean coal technologies now.
 
Not cheap when you factor in the problems caused by climate change.
Not just climate change. Coal is expensive in terms of human life.

Black lung Surges; A Tragedy – But Not a Surprise
From the early days of the 20th Century, until the passage of the 1969 Coal Act in the wake of the Farmington #9 Disaster, over 100,000 miners died in the United States from Black Lung Disease.


From 1970 through 2016, black lung disease was the underlying or contributing cause of death for a total of 75,178 miners.
 
Article 51

The effort is not just Denmark; the Danish military is conducting patrols with NATO allies, including Germany, France, Sweden, and Norway.
Art 51? What are you talking about?

We are nato, the nato commander was appointed by Trump and reports to Trump

There was no armed invasion of Greenland
 
And they were weeks away 1,500 weeks ago too.
No, they were't weeks away during the first Trump admin. They didn't restart their nuke program, and enrichment to 60 percent until they got Joey Xiden in the the White House. He was their *****
 
Art 51? What are you talking about?

We are nato, the nato commander was appointed by Trump and reports to Trump

There was no armed invasion of Greenland
Then why did several NATO nations send warships to defend Greenland?

Ans: Trump threatened to invade Greenland, and take it by force.


he Trump administration threatened military action to take control of Greenland as an option
 
There are clean coal technologies now.
There is technology that makes the emissions less damaging to the environment and the public's health. There is no such thing as clean coal.
 
Renewables are not a “scam”.

The bulk of the electricity you buy from Canada is “renewables”. Almost all of our electricity is produced by hydro electric, nuclear or wind/solar in Ontario.

We also have some of the cheapest electrical power in North America.

We closed the last of our coal fired plants in the 1990’s. Air quality in Southern Ontario immediately improved.

Hospital admissions/emergency visits for asthma and breathing problems droppped like a stone.

But keep believing Republican lies about renewables.

Another failure....................

"The Greatest Dam in the World": Building Hoover Dam ...​

1776177779795.webp
National Park Service (.gov)
https://www.nps.gov › articles ›




Mar 30, 2023 — Hoover Dam is as tall as a 60-story building. It was the highest dam in the world when it was completed in 1935. Its base is as thick as two football fields .


It needs to be destroyed.

There's oil underneath the Colorado river and they ruined drilling.
 
Then why did several NATO nations send warships to defend Greenland?

Ans: Trump threatened to invade Greenland, and take it by force.


he Trump administration threatened military action to take control of Greenland as an option
They didn't.

NATO is there because we want NATO there, Greenland is an important piece of real estate in the Artic, that we want to protect and keep out of the hands of China and Russia.
 
15th post
Are you saying Netanyu lied?
No, he didn't say they were weeks away then. Trump, had the maximum pressure campaign was working well....then Xiden got out of it,and they were quickly weeks away again
 
There is technology that makes the emissions less damaging to the environment and the public's health. There is no such thing as clean coal.
There is no such thing as “clean energy” period.

Solar requires lots of toxic materials and the infrastructure needs to be completely rebuilt within 15 years. Same with wind.
 
There is no such thing as “clean energy” period.

Solar requires lots of toxic materials and the infrastructure needs to be completely rebuilt within 15 years. Same with wind.
That's a disingenuous talking point. The key advantage to renewable energy is wind, solar, hydro don't emit the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change. Is there an environmental impact from renewables? Yes. Is it exponentially lower than that from fossil fuels? Yes.
 
For those who have not noticed, trump has been doing what he can shaping US policy to promote the use of fossil fuels and kill renewable energy projects.

Coal’s fortunes shift as Trump uses orders and taxpayer money to keep plants operating​


The most recent example of the latter being........

White House to pay TotalEnergies $1 billion to kill off East Coast wind farm projects​


Implying he will not be happy with this development.

‘Asia’s Ukraine moment’: How the Iran war could accelerate a shift into renewables

The fallout from the Iran war is likely to expedite the shift away from fossil fuels and make countries think differently about the role renewables can play in shoring up energy security, analysts told CNBC.

The Middle East crisis has severely disrupted oil exports through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, which typically carries about a fifth of the world’s oil and liquified natural gas (LNG) and represents a key choke point for fertilizer trade.

It has shone a light on the extent to which the world remains deeply reliant on fragile fossil fuel trade routes, while surging oil and gas prices have rattled energy markets and triggered widespread inflation fears.

Asia’s reliance on imported energy means it now sits at the forefront of the global fossil fuel crisis, but supply disruptions are also hitting hard in Europe and Africa, where countries are responding to rising fuel costs and a considerable threat to food security.

The head of the International Energy Agency said the energy transition was moving “very strongly” before the Iran war began — but the fallout from the resulting energy shock means countries will likely direct even more investment toward clean energy sources.


Unintended consequences abound from the il-fated decision to join Bibi's jihad against Iran. Consequences not subject to being remedied by bluster, lies, deflection, denial, and pointing the finger of blame at the deep state, the fake news, Nancy Pelosi, or any other imaginary bogeymen. IOW, the usual approach. Which is why Don can't seem to find a solution to the problem of his creation.
Trump is more interested in not letting Iran develop and use nuclear missiles. Why would you be against that?
 
Back
Top Bottom