Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 94
Thanks Tree27Thanks

Thread: The War on Coal is Over.

  1. #11
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,166
    Thanks
    2779

    Also over are the War On Irrationality, the War On Civility, the War On Batshit Craziness, the War On Unhinged Raging Against Nonexistant Shit, and a couple of other things that we used to be "at war with" but are now totally tolerant of.
    Thanks from johnflesh and Blues63

  2. #12
    Established Member NeoVsMatrix's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    7,105
    Thanks
    5986

    From
    NY
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Why would anyone root for fucking coal? That shit is sooo 19th century.
    Just like those who root for it.
    Thanks from Lunchboxxy

  3. #13
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    42,033
    Thanks
    24758

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Why would anyone root for fucking coal? That shit is sooo 19th century.
    Saw the announcement by Pruitt yesterday. Coal miners gave him a standing ovation for this. They were positively giddy.

    https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...-a-war-on-coal

  4. #14
    Chubby Member
    Joined
    May 2006
    Posts
    9,166
    Thanks
    2779

    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Saw the announcement by Pruitt yesterday. Coal miners gave him a standing ovation for this. They were positively giddy.

    https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...-a-war-on-coal
    Thus is preserved the long illustrious history of Americans cheering for stupid shit that does them no good and following it up by voting against their own interests.

    Democracy doesn't work in a world of ignorant fools. Children cannot govern themselves.

  5. #15
    Moderator HayJenn's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    43,089
    Thanks
    33344

    From
    CA
    President Trump has repeatedly promised to roll back the 2015 rule, which attempts to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants by about a third from 2005 levels by requiring states to come up with their own plans to increase their mix of renewables and gas. The question was how getting rid of the rule would happen. There were several possible scenarios: One option was to succumb to climate change deniers’ demands and attempt to challenge the EPA’s finding that greenhouse gasses endanger human health. The other was to give into certain business interests, like the Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers, and replace the Clean Power Plan with a weaker proposal that would have required only minor tweaks to existing energy efficiency measures inside power plants.

    It turns out Pruitt’s EPA is doing neither. It’s repealing the climate rule by kicking the can down the road. The only specific action to emerge today was to solicit public comments for what the EPA might do at some point in the future. Today’s action provides further evidence that the Trump administration’s EPA is unlikely to address the driving causes of climate change. The specific effects of today’s action, Earthjustice Attorney Abigail Dillen suggests, could be that “the president and Pruitt will presumably score a few political points with their base, and maybe some coal execs will fly down to Mar-a-Lago to celebrate a symbolic victory.”


    Nevertheless, in a landmark 2007 decision, the Supreme Court required the EPA to take action if it determined that the negative health effects from greenhouse gas emissions is scientifically proven—which it is. That decision could eventually create a legal dilemma for the EPA if it repeals the Clean Power Plan without a replacement—a problem that even the Heartland Institute, a think tank that rejects the scientific consensus on climate change, acknowledged to me. So what’s Pruitt really trying to accomplish by today’s action? “They will get a talking point,” former EPA attorney Joe Goffman says, which means that Pruitt and his allies can repeat their assertion that the Obama administration overreached and overestimated the benefits of the rule. Nonetheless, Goffman notes, talking points are irrelevant when considered from a legal or policy point of view, because they avoid contending with “the range of questions [on air and pollution] the agency is obligated to address.”

    There?s More to Scott Pruitt?s Attack on Obama?s Climate Reg than Meets the Eye ? Mother Jones

    So in other words, all show no go per usual Thank goodness!!

  6. #16
    Thought Provocateur NightSwimmer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    33,297
    Thanks
    30703

    From
    United States
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Saw the announcement by Pruitt yesterday. Coal miners gave him a standing ovation for this. They were positively giddy.

    https://www.greentechmedia.com/artic...-a-war-on-coal
    So what? There are only 50,000 coal miners in the US, and most of them live in the same region. There will be even fewer coal miners over the coming years, "War on Coal", or not.

  7. #17
    Junior Member
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,231
    Thanks
    272

    From
    New Mexico
    Here is an article on the CO2 emmission algae fertilizer usage:

    https://www.researchgate.net/post/Ca...on_is_required

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Joined
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    8,053
    Thanks
    1363

    From
    Banned
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Why would anyone root for fucking coal? That shit is sooo 19th century.
    This doesn't affect NOx, SOx, and other real pollution restrictions.

    Coal is in a death spiral, but it is nice to finally see science used for a change to make decisions.

  9. #19
    Junior Member
    Joined
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    1,755
    Thanks
    820

    From
    Maryland USA
    Quote Originally Posted by OldGaffer View Post
    Why would anyone root for fucking coal? That shit is sooo 19th century.
    Perhaps, you are only thinking domestically and have not considered world markets. Currently, Australia is the leading exporter of coal, the US is fourth and, hopefully, moving up the list. The Port of Baltimore reported that this past year, it has experienced a 19% increase in its export of coal. Believe me, if any locale needs the jobs and the revenues, it's Baltimore.

  10. #20
    Junior Member
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,231
    Thanks
    272

    From
    New Mexico
    Here is another CO2 from Coal to drive Algae production Article:

    MSU/PHYCO2 collaboration works for cleaner power | MSUToday | Michigan State University

Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Coal on the Rise
    By Miller47 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 83
    Last Post: 27th June 2017, 01:15 PM
  2. Coal, In The End It Is Still A Lump
    By Minotaur in forum Current Events
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19th June 2017, 01:16 PM
  3. Coal
    By Blueneck in forum Healthcare
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 28th July 2016, 05:34 PM
  4. Coal
    By Zaragrunudgeyon in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 31st October 2008, 05:44 PM
  5. If no coal then what?
    By NedC in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 22nd June 2007, 04:50 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed