"Science be damned!" Let's have Oil rule our lives!

[Nostra]

Let the market decide? Let the corporate actors who will increase profits by not having the follow anti-pollution rules, thus contributing to the unfolding climate change disaster, let them decide? What a great idea.

What is this “UNFOLDING CLIMATE CHANGE DISASTER’, Short Bus?

 

[Nostra]

In other words, YOU do not agree that it can damage the environment as much as the scientists say, right. Where do your studies that contradict that come from?

Oh, and by the way, already Climate change has had a negative impact on our world, with RECORD high temperatures, bigger

Climate change has significantly altered the world, with global temperatures rising and extreme weather conditions.............View attachment 1217824

1.5∘C1.5 raised to the composed with power C
above pre-industrial levels (1850-1900) by 2024, making the past decade the warmest on record. This has driven faster sea-level rises, accelerated ice sheet melting, and increased the frequency of extreme weather, severely impacting ecosystems, agriculture, and human safety worldwide.

Prove this record high temps.

I say you are a liar.

 

[sartre play]

Reducing rules that help keep pollution down, Not so good.
Protecting our air and water is a big deal.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Let the market decide? Let the corporate actors who will increase profits by not having the follow anti-pollution rules, thus contributing to the unfolding climate change disaster, let them decide? What a great idea.

How much more are you willing to pay for all your electricity to release zero CO2?

 

[Luckyone]

You are proving massive ignorance about science with that post

WE cannlot get diabetes. WE cannot eat right or eat massive sugar. Only an individual can,.

You are proposing restrictive and draconian regulations on us to profit some at the expense of others. And that is based on dubious scientific claims.

Draconian Regulations? Please explain to me, which of the following regulations is draconian and why!

Key Climate Change Regulations and Policies

• Power Plant Carbon Standards: Finalized EPA rules (2024) setting strict CO2 limits for new gas-fired turbines and existing coal, oil, and gas-fired power plants to ensure 90% control of carbon pollution.
• Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) (2022): The largest U.S. investment in clean energy, providing tax credits for non-emitting energy sources and implementing the Methane Emissions Reduction Program.
• Vehicle Emission Standards: Implementation of stronger passenger vehicle standards to increase fuel economy to 49 miles per gallon by 2026, aiming for 50% electric vehicle sales share by 2030.
• Methane Emission Reductions: EPA regulations updating standards for oil and gas operations and landfills to capture methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
• Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) Phase-down: The American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act directs the EPA to phase down HFCs, which are high-global warming potential chemicals.
• Clean Air Act (CAA) Implementation: The foundational law allowing the EPA to regulate GHGs from stationary and mobile sources.
• International/National Net-Zero Goals: Many jurisdictions have enacted laws mandating net-zero emissions, such as the UK Climate Change Act 2008 and various U.S. state targets aiming for 2050.

Industry and Sector-Specific Actions

• Building Performance Standards: Policies focusing on energy efficiency and transitioning away from fossil fuel heating.
• Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Mandates a certain volume of renewable fuel to replace or reduce the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel.
• Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Incentivizing technology to capture and store CO2 emissions from industrial sources.

Dubious scientific data?

Over 99% of peer-reviewed literature supports human-caused climate change. Notably, 11,000 scientists signed a 2019 declaration of a climate emergency, and thousands are involved in IPCC reporting.

This is how they arrived at their conclusions
How Scientists Arrived at This Conclusion:

• Peer-Reviewed Literature Review: A 2021 survey of 88,125 climate-related studies found that over 99.9% of peer-reviewed papers agree that climate change is primarily caused by human activities.
• Analysis of Atmospheric Evidence: Scientists found that burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) increases carbon dioxide (
  CO2cap C cap O sub 2
  ) in the atmosphere.
• Greenhouse Effect Understanding: Researchers have known since the mid-19th century that certain gases trap heat; human activity has amplified this natural greenhouse effect.
• Expert Surveys: Surveys of climate experts have consistently shown that 97% to 100% agree that human activity is the main driver of global warming, with higher consensus among those with greater expertise.

So now that I have given you all this DATA that supports the OP, please give me the DATA you have that supports your conclusions!!!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Draconian Regulations? Please explain to me, which of the following regulations is draconian and why!

Key Climate Change Regulations and Policies

• Power Plant Carbon Standards: Finalized EPA rules (2024) setting strict CO2 limits for new gas-fired turbines and existing coal, oil, and gas-fired power plants to ensure 90% control of carbon pollution.
• Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) (2022): The largest U.S. investment in clean energy, providing tax credits for non-emitting energy sources and implementing the Methane Emissions Reduction Program.
• Vehicle Emission Standards: Implementation of stronger passenger vehicle standards to increase fuel economy to 49 miles per gallon by 2026, aiming for 50% electric vehicle sales share by 2030.
• Methane Emission Reductions: EPA regulations updating standards for oil and gas operations and landfills to capture methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
• Hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) Phase-down: The American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act directs the EPA to phase down HFCs, which are high-global warming potential chemicals.
• Clean Air Act (CAA) Implementation: The foundational law allowing the EPA to regulate GHGs from stationary and mobile sources.
• International/National Net-Zero Goals: Many jurisdictions have enacted laws mandating net-zero emissions, such as the UK Climate Change Act 2008 and various U.S. state targets aiming for 2050.

Industry and Sector-Specific Actions

• Building Performance Standards: Policies focusing on energy efficiency and transitioning away from fossil fuel heating.
• Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Mandates a certain volume of renewable fuel to replace or reduce the quantity of petroleum-based transportation fuel.
• Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS): Incentivizing technology to capture and store CO2 emissions from industrial sources.

Dubious scientific data?

Over 99% of peer-reviewed literature supports human-caused climate change. Notably, 11,000 scientists signed a 2019 declaration of a climate emergency, and thousands are involved in IPCC reporting.

This is how they arrived at their conclusions
How Scientists Arrived at This Conclusion:

• Peer-Reviewed Literature Review: A 2021 survey of 88,125 climate-related studies found that over 99.9% of peer-reviewed papers agree that climate change is primarily caused by human activities.
• Analysis of Atmospheric Evidence: Scientists found that burning fossil fuels (coal, oil, gas) increases carbon dioxide (
  CO2cap C cap O sub 2
  ) in the atmosphere.
• Greenhouse Effect Understanding: Researchers have known since the mid-19th century that certain gases trap heat; human activity has amplified this natural greenhouse effect.
• Expert Surveys: Surveys of climate experts have consistently shown that 97% to 100% agree that human activity is the main driver of global warming, with higher consensus among those with greater expertise.

So now that I have given you all this DATA that supports the OP, please give me the DATA you have that supports your conclusions!!!

Please explain to me, which of the following regulations is draconian and why!

• Power Plant Carbon Standards: Finalized EPA rules (2024) setting strict CO2 limits for new gas-fired turbines and existing coal, oil, and gas-fired power plants to ensure 90% control of carbon pollution.

This one. Post the cost/benefit analysis.

• Vehicle Emission Standards: Implementation of stronger passenger vehicle standards to increase fuel economy to 49 miles per gallon by 2026, aiming for 50% electric vehicle sales share by 2030.

This one. Post the cost/benefit analysis.

• Methane Emission Reductions: EPA regulations updating standards for oil and gas operations and landfills to capture methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

This one. Post the cost/benefit analysis.

 

[Hafar1014]

Trump set to gut US climate change policy and environmental regulations: White House official​

WASHINGTON February 10, 2026 (AP) — The Trump administration is expected this week to revoke a scientific finding that long has been the central basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change, according to a White House official.

The Environmental Protection Agency will issue a final rule rescinding a 2009 government declaration known as the endangerment finding. That Obama-era policy determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare.

Here is the percentage of scientists that say that climate change is caused by humans

Between 97% and 99.9% of actively publishing climate scientists agree that humans are the primary cause of recent global warming. Multiple studies confirm this overwhelming consensus, with research analyzing scientific literature indicating that more than 99% of peer-reviewed papers support human-caused climate change.

The Causes of Climate Change​

Over the last century, burning of fossil fuels like coal and oil has increased the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). This increase happens because the coal or oil burning process combines carbon with oxygen in the air to make CO2.

Who benefits from cutting these regulations:

• Key beneficiaries of removing carbon emission regulations include:
  • Fossil Fuel Industry: Oil, gas, and coal companies benefit from lower compliance expenditures, such as the elimination of reporting requirements (e.g., the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program) and reduced costs for upgrading equipment to meet emissions standards.
  • Manufacturing Sector: Industries with high energy consumption, such as steel and cement manufacturers, may face lower operating costs, allowing them to compete more effectively with foreign, higher-carbon products.
  • Transportation and Automobile Industry: Automakers, particularly those focusing on internal combustion engines, may see lower manufacturing costs and fewer fines, while the trucking industry expects reduced logistical costs, according to the American Trucking Association.
  • Small Businesses: Supporters argue that removing "burdensome" regulations will save small businesses billions in compliance costs.
  • Consumers (Short-Term): Proponents argue that reducing energy regulations will lead to cheaper, more reliable, and more affordable energy for heating and transportation.
  
  While there are some short-term economic benefits to Americans and American companies by taking down these regulations, such as tangible cost reductions, the removal of these regulations is heavily criticized by environmental and health advocates. As such, this is more about short-term political goals of Trump than it is about helping the future of our world.
• View attachment 1217533
• View attachment 1217535

The economy benefits the people benefit from lower energy costs. Current climate change policy is a slush fund for the green energy industrial complex that builds high cost unreliable energy that can never meet the demand of our economy. It increases the cost of cars and gas and damages the economy. States that have the most green energy have the highest costs. Kill this stupid agreement before it kills us.

 

[Meister]

Thanks for showing pics that are 15 years and older, it just documents China's factual progress fantastically.

Your above Nanpu bridge photo is from before 2005, since the frontal cable anchor pillars were raised in about that time.

This is Nanpu Bridge in 2025 !!!
View attachment 1217695

As for your China coal and pollution story

China in 2025 reached about 1900 GW on renewable energy - USA about 400 GW, whilst the USA is still being the overall largest emitter of CO2 with rising emissions, China's CO2 has already peaked and was down 2% in 2025.
Whilst renewable energy accounts for about 32% of China's GDP - it isn't even 8 % in the USA.

And your pathological fraudster and narcissistic liar is continuing to take his MAGA dolts for a ride.
Whilst he feeds you Venezuela dreams on Oil - his administration:

According to the U.S. Solar Market Insight Q4 2025 report released today by the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and Wood Mackenzie, 73% of all solar capacity installed this year has been built in states won by President Trump, including 8 of the top 10 states for new installations: Texas, Indiana, Florida, Arizona, Ohio, Utah, Kentucky and Arkansas. Utah surged into the top 10 solar states this quarter with two utility-scale projects coming online totaling over 1 GW of capacity.

Whatever you say, you wouldn't lie.
Where do we buy the solar panels, and the wind mills? Why....it's China.
The redistribution of wealth. You're welcome Kuss.

 

[Meister]

Doesn't change the fact that he is as usual talking bull and lies to keep his MAGA dolts in line, whilst doing the opposite to please his Billionaire investors and thus filling his own wallet. Those Billionaires know exactly that future bucks are being made in renewables, and not in antiques such as Oil, Coal and NLG.

Only stupid people - obviously - don't get it.

Speaking of talking bulls and lies........
How many coal plants go online each year in China?

‘Rush’ for new coal in China hits record high in 2025 as climate deadline looms - Carbon Brief

Proposals to build coal-fired plants in China reached a record high in 2025, according to a new study by CREA.

www.carbonbrief.org

Read it and weep, Kruss. Sucks that you would feel a need to defend that.
Your propaganda isn't taken very seriously, I'm sure you understand as to why.

 

[Luckyone]

The economy benefits the people benefit from lower energy costs. Current climate change policy is a slush fund for the green energy industrial complex that builds high cost unreliable energy that can never meet the demand of our economy. It increases the cost of cars and gas and damages the economy. States that have the most green energy have the highest costs. Kill this stupid agreement before it kills us.

so the safety of humans and the continuation of this planet as a place where humans can live, is a secondary issue to what is important, for the short-term, which is Americans pocketbooks regarding the cost of cars and gas that damages the economy (until humans can no longer exist), right?

This is what 11,000 scientists are saying will happen to this planet if Climate change is not addressed and fixed!

 

[Nostra]

so the safety of humans and the continuation of this planet as a place where humans can live, is a secondary issue to what is important, for the short-term, which is Americans pocketbooks regarding the cost of cars and gas that damages the economy (until humans can no longer exist), right?

This is what 11,000 scientists are saying will happen to this planet if Climate change is not addressed and fixed!

View attachment 1217852

Earth will turn yellow and orange? Pretty.

 

[Meister]

so the safety of humans and the continuation of this planet as a place where humans can live, is a secondary issue to what is important, for the short-term, which is Americans pocketbooks regarding the cost of cars and gas that damages the economy (until humans can no longer exist), right?

This is what 11,000 scientists are saying will happen to this planet if Climate change is not addressed and fixed!

View attachment 1217852

Didn't Al Gore give Earth just 10 years if we didn't get off of fossil fuels???
That was back in 2008, I believe.

 

[Nostra]

Didn't Al Gore give Earth just 10 years if we didn't get off of fossil fuels???
That was back in 2008, I believe.

The Earth has ended about a dozen times, according to MMGW Cult predictions.



.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Earth will turn yellow and orange? Pretty.

EVERY SINGLE prediction made by the supposed experts computer models has not happened, not even one of them has been right yet we ae to believe that the ones for a hundred years from now will be right. The fools that support this nonsense are delusional and amazingly stupid. Yet as you see they continue down that path.

 

[justoffal]

Why is it that all of you leftists want to force high energy prices on the poor and minorities? Isn't that social injustice?

And racism!

 

[Hafar1014]

so the safety of humans and the continuation of this planet as a place where humans can live, is a secondary issue to what is important, for the short-term, which is Americans pocketbooks regarding the cost of cars and gas that damages the economy (until humans can no longer exist), right?

This is what 11,000 scientists are saying will happen to this planet if Climate change is not addressed and fixed!

View attachment 1217852

The planet isnt threatened and never was. The quality of our lives are threatened today for a problem that never existed to line the pockets of rich green energy elites.
Your picture is what a world with no CO 2 will look like. All the green plants dead

 

[Soupnazi630]

so the safety of humans and the continuation of this planet as a place where humans can live, is a secondary issue to what is important, for the short-term, which is Americans pocketbooks regarding the cost of cars and gas that damages the economy (until humans can no longer exist), right?

This is what 11,000 scientists are saying will happen to this planet if Climate change is not addressed and fixed!

View attachment 1217852

You just proved my point

There is NO evidence of this doom and gloom prediction your post about

It is alramist crap and no reason to push draconian laws and regulations.

NO science is supporting your bullshit

 

[Billiejeens]

"hopefully" that will be the case, but removing regulations on existing problems does not solve anything

There are no existing problems.

 

[Luckyone]

The planet isnt threatened and never was. The quality of our lives are threatened today for a problem that never existed to line the pockets of rich green energy elites.
Your picture is what a world with no CO 2 will look like. All the green plants dead

So the opinion of 11,000 scientists means nothing. YOU know better, right?

 

[Hafar1014]

So the opinion of 11,000 scientists means nothing. YOU know better, right?

They know where their funds come from and all their dire predictions never come true