Possible 90% REDUCTION in CO2 emmissions by 2035?

TBH I didn't think it was possible either but the Math shows that the TRENDS are all heading for LOWER costs which means HIGHER profits for the greed addled Wall Street Casino Banksters.

That is WHY the predictions turned out to be accurate. Greed and self interest are DRIVING these trends.

The MOST expensive part of a cheeseburger is the meat with the cheese coming in next. BOTH are Proteins that can now be manufactured commercially for $1/ib instead of being farmed at ten times the price. From a C-suite Executive POV switching from cow protein to something from a factory is a no-brainer decision on cost alone. This is an environmental TWOFER, eliminating dairy and beef herds reduces BOTH methane and CO2. Of those the methane is the most damaging.

The BEST part about this is that corporate execs will do what is RIGHT for the environment because it is what is also right from an economic standpoint. Lower costs for supplies means more wiggle room for higher salaries and benefits. Higher salaries means more disposable income which translates into selling more cheeseburgers which means higher profits. That is the Henry Ford economic model from a century ago.

So you are correct that the prediction is optimistic but when you see how quickly corporations adapted to using the interwebs to sell their products online instead of brick and mortar stores you will appreciate that when they given an incentive to make money corporations will ALWAYS invest in that opportunity.

REDUCING our bovine herds is only ONE aspect of this reduction but an important one.

Yes, this is the MOST important aspect of all and we agree that the US market will DRAG their feet kicking and screaming into the future,

BUT because transportation is responsible for 29% of all greenhouse gas emissions even a small change makes a difference.

Please note that the Trend Models do NOT require 100% of all vehicles to be EV's in order to meet the 2035 goal.

https://www.ev-volumes.com/#:~:text=EVs are therefore expected to,, down from 35% previously.

The EU and China will be over the forecast while the US will be under but the GLOBAL average will still be the same.

This is where the POLITICS come into play. The Fossil Fuel Cartel is spreading DISINFORMATION about EV's and Solar power because they KNOW that it is direct THREAT to their CASH COW.

They are LOBBYING hard in Congress and probably OWN every single RED vote and plenty of BLUE ones too, LOOKING at you, Manchin and Sinema.

But just as with the Xtofascists condemning the LBGTQ community from the pulpit is causing a DECREASE in religious attendance because those LEAVING have family who are LBGTQ there will be a similar EROSION when it comes to Residential Solar. While you will probably have to pry Bubba's hands off the wheel of his ICE pickup because he sees Utilities in the same way he sees Taxes. If he can find a way to NOT pay that utility bill by just climbing on his roof and installing some panels he will do it because he LIKES the idea of SAVING his own money. It fits with his sense of being a "rugged individual" who doesn't need or depend on anyone else. The Preppers have probably already done the Math and have them installed.

This is where SELF INTEREST becomes the DRIVING motivation. Politically they will still DERIDE "government spending" and oppose any and all forms of regulations but when it comes to their own PERSONAL spending they won't have a problem doing what is in their own best interests.

What I don't understand is WHY, as Proud Americans, they are WILLING to ALLOW the Chinese to take the lead and make FOOLS of our nation?

If they were GENUINE patriots they would be DEMANDING that we take the LEAD in EV's and Green Energy production.

Something is not right down there in the Red states, they seem to have taken an OATH of LOYALTY to a TRAITOR and SUPPORT a party that is SCREWING them over. Whatever happened to those GENUINE conservatives that put our NATION ahead of petty partisan politics?

 

I uphold your RIGHT to BELIEVE in whatever DISINFORMATION you like.

But BLAMING the Dems for the CRIMES committed by your TRAITOR-in-Chief based entirely upon DISINFORMATION sourced from the Xtofascist controlled GOP is a DENIAL of factually documented REALITY.

I can guarantee that if the Xtofascist controlled GOP regains control of the Oval office YOUR freedoms will VANISH while you APPLAUD them being taken away from you.

If you can’t see or admit that, you are proving my point.

 

True but I consider it unconstitutional anyway. I accept the 10th amendment as written. Obviously the supreme court does not. It is nonsense like this that has grown federal government into the intrusive, incompetent, corrupt monster it is today. The supreme court makes mistakes. I'm sure you agree with that.

The advancement of science belongs in the private sector or, if the states want to take it up, then there as well. But it is banned in federal government by the 10th. You seem to be interested in the constitution but you don't seem to understand what it means and why it says what it does.

 

You are inventing what he said. The "fossil fuel cartel" is government operated. Those governments can be totalitarian with their populations but not with ours. If they are totalitarian it is not because of fossil fuels. Try to avoid emotion in your arguments and stick with facts.

 

PROJECTION content duly noted.

 

Flamebaiting and Taunting projection duly noted.

 

Because competition is at the base of capitalism, lower costs generally result in lower selling prices.

 

Reducing carbon emissions is a profitable business for anybody who wants to take advantage. Elon Musk has, and he's made a bunde. One of the threats to the U.S. remaining the technological leader of the world is all the Science denialism. We have the capability to develop the best technology to reduce carbon emissions. So our country could really benefit from it.

The problem is that we have all these science denialists who have made it a political issue, when it's actually a great business opportunity. With basically NO drawbacks, other than the need for a shift in the paradigm.

 

Good. I'm glad you read it. Think about it.

 

You really should listen to yourself and take your own advice for a change.

 

Glad you read it. It is solid advice. Think about it.

 

A change from what? I'm actually trying to be useful, not combative. I ignore the combative things you say.

 

Ditto!

 

What nonsense! Many of the greatest scientific advancements, thanks to which we became a world power, have come from the government. Science belongs wherever we can get it. Be it from the private or public sector. We NEED science to stay competitive and it doesn't matter where it comes from. Many advancements in science were not profitable. We would have no microchips, the air industry would be decades behind where it is now, our food production would be immensely reduced... if it weren't for GOVERNMENT-funded scientific programs.

This blind hatred of the government from the extreme right is what will eventually make us lose the edge we have in the world if we don't find a way to control this mock cockiness. The government has a role, the private industry has a role. We can't compete in the world without either.

 

That wasn't combative. It was advice. I consider it ignored. Have a prosperous new year.

 

What metrics are you using to determine affordibility? Consider that most people dont have the cash (or even credit) for the initial investment of solar. Long term payoff only works if you can afford the initial investment, and most people cant.

 

nvm, i had a brain fart

 

How about NOTHING? Or is that too expensive? Ok... so how about you get to sell the excess electricity that you create for a PROFIT? Depending on where you live that is quite possible, you know.

Right now there is an initial investment. With the coordination of government and local business, that CAN be transformed to ZERO...or very close. But we need to get our political heads out of the oil industry's ass to achieve that.

 

The same can be said for cars. Yet, I don't hear anyone say that people shouldn't buy cars because few can actually afford them. Here is an idea: Instead of buying the $70,000 GMC Sierra Denali, you could buy the Elevation AND have enough money leftover to buy the rooftop solar and become energy independent for the next 20 years. Of course, I realize that heather and cooled leather seats are much more fun than buying solar panels. Priorities...

 

This isn't quite true. While I don't know about the local business part (I'd imagine that is highly dependent on the business you go to) I do know that most government subsidies to promote individual household use is not given out until after you have made an initial investment, then it pays back that investment. I've never heard of any that pays the initial investment up front, usually to prevent people just taking the money and running.

 

I don’t want Trump. I also oppose Merrick Garland, and thank goodness that he did not get to bring his fascist theories to the Supreme Court. Roman Catholics are not subversive forces, and neither are concerned parents who attend school board meetings, as Mr. Garland believes.

I also wonder about the payments that went to the Biden family, but I know that does not concern you.

 

Most people buy used cars. Which is another problem with EVs having the large cost of periodic battery replacement. Its common for an ICE vehicle to reach ~200000m without any substantial work needing to be done to it. EV batteries are an expensive component that typically need to be replaced multiple times over that range. Batteries might get better over time ...or we might run out of the rare earth minerals required to make them.

 

Its a nice idea, but how do you propose to reduce the initial investment? IE- who pays to put the solar panels on my house, given that I can't afford it myself?

 

It's a silly question, just like you don't reduce the cost of the initial investment for a car or a house, which the vast majority can't afford, even if pre-owned, you don't reduce the initial investment of solar. People with money can buy it straight out. Others will have to finance through loans, like they finance houses or cars. Or, they can have a company install solar on their roof without ANY investment, and then the solar company charges them for the power, which is still cheaper than power from the electric company. I don't know why you hold solar to some sort of impossible standard that other investments are not held to, i.e. that everyone has to be able to afford the investment without financing.

Now, as I said, people don't LIKE to invest into solar. Why? Because it's not one of their priorities. If it would be made a priority by society, like owning a shiny new car is, there is no reason that solar can't be on EVERY rooftop, just like pretty much everyone owns a car. But, no, we'll have other countries beat us to this, while we go back to the energy stone age.

And, btw, I HAVE solar on my rooftop.

 

There's nothing stopping people from doing that now. I was under the impression the purpose of the discussion was along the lines of 'we need to do something about this', and I'm asking 'what should we do'? If nothing, then cool, people can continue to go solar if/when they want to.