Green New Deal proposes to get rid of air travel, replaced by high speed rail?
- Jan 11, 2014
- 8,624
- 17,213
Ninja dont you drive some **** bucket geo tracker? What you talkin about 'i like to drive muscle cars'? 
This is what we call a straw man. You also forgot this part.puhhhleezzzz, "democratic socialism" is a direct import from Europe.
dont blame me ol' girl trying to get rid of farting cows & airplane.
- Jul 19, 2012
- 23,023
- 33,725
Oh yeah that's why you improve abilities of the vehicles and power source. Like they been doing with fuel efficiency for 40+ years. Stuff doesn't happen overnight.
Cars were averaging 16-17mpg just 30 years ago. Throw enough money into R&D we can see some cool stuff happen.
Like imagine if folks saw the Model T and were like breh my horse faster than that, wtf y'all doin
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
ninjahood , random/everything aside, what's your 9-5 out of curiosity? And my inquiry has nothing to do with this thread.
i drive.
electric cars been around 100 yrs b...not gonna happen outside of banning options to drive gas driven vehicles.
Last edited:
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
The Socialist That Could
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL FEBRUARY 07, 2019The Republican
The Republican Party has a secret weapon for 2020. It’s especially effective because it’s stealthy: The Democrats seem oblivious to its power. And the GOP needn’t lift a finger for it to work. All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch 29-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez . . . exist.
AOC, as she’s better known, today exists largely in front of the cameras. In a few months she’s gone from an unknown New York bartender to the democratic socialist darling of the left and its media hordes. Her megaphone is so loud that she rivals Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the face of the Democratic Party. Republicans don’t know whether to applaud or laugh. Most do both.
For them, what’s not to love? She’s set off a fratricidal war on the left, with her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, this week slamming the “radical conservatives” among the Democrats holding the party “hostage.” She’s made friends with Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s Labour Party, who has been accused of anti-Semitism. She’s called the American system of wealth creation “immoral” and believes government has a duty to provide “economic security” to people who are “unwilling to work.” As a representative of New York, she’s making California look sensible.
On Thursday Ms. Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her vaunted Green New Deal, complete with the details of how Democrats plan to reach climate nirvana in a mere 10 years. It came in the form of a resolution, sponsored in the Senate by Massachusetts’ Edward Markey, on which AOC is determined to force a full House vote. That means every Democrat in Washington will get to go on the record in favor of abolishing air travel, outlawing steaks, forcing all American homeowners to retrofit their houses, putting every miner, oil rigger, livestock rancher and gas-station attendant out of a job, and spending trillions and trillions more tax money. Oh, also for government-run health care, which is somehow a prerequisite for a clean economy.
It’s a GOP dream, especially because the media presented her plan with a straight face—as a legitimate proposal from a legitimate leader in the Democratic Party. Republicans are thrilled to treat it that way in the march to 2020, as their set-piece example of what Democrats would do to the economy and average Americans if given control. The Green New Deal encapsulates everything Americans fear from government, all in one bonkers resolution.
It is for starters, a massive plan for the government to take over and micromanage much the economy. Take the central plank, its diktat of producing 100% of U.S. electricity “through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources” by 2030. As Ron Bailey at Reason has noted, a 2015 plan from Stanford envisioning the goal called for the installation of 154,000 offshore wind turbines, 335,000 onshore wind turbines, 75 million residential photovoltaic (solar) systems, 2.75 million commercial solar systems, and 46,000 utility-scale solar facilities. AOC has been clear it will be government building all this, not the private sector.
And that might be the easy part. According to an accompanying fact sheet, the Green New Deal would also get rid of combustion engines, “build charging stations everywhere,” “upgrade or replace every building in U.S.,” do the same with all “infrastructure,” and crisscross the nation with “high-speed rail.”
Buried in the details, the Green New Deal also promises government control of the most fundamental aspects of private life. The fact sheet explains why the resolution doesn’t call for “banning fossil fuels” or for “zero” emissions across the entire economy—at least at first. It’s because “we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast” (emphasis mine).
This is an acknowledgment that planes don’t run on anything but fossil fuel. No jet fuel, no trips to see granny. It’s also an acknowledgment that livestock produce methane, which has led climate alarmists to engage in “meatless Mondays.” AOC may not prove able to eradicate “fully” every family Christmas or strip of bacon in a decade, but that’s the goal.
Finally, the resolution is Democratic math at its best. It leaves out a price tag, and is equally vague on what kind of taxes would be needed to cover the cost. But it would run to tens of trillions of dollars. The fact sheet asserts the cost shouldn’t worry anyone, since the Federal Reserve can just “extend credit” to these projects! And “new public banks can be created to extend credit,” too! And Americans will get lots of “shared prosperity” from their “investments.” À la Solyndra.
At least some Democrats seem to be aware of what a danger this is, which is why Ms. Pelosi threw some cold water on the Green New Deal this week. They should be scared. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a freight train gaining speed by the day—and helping Republicans with every passing minute.
https://www-wsj-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-socialist-that-could-11549583738?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&_tf=From %1$s&share=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-socialist-that-could-11549583738
KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL FEBRUARY 07, 2019The Republican
The Republican Party has a secret weapon for 2020. It’s especially effective because it’s stealthy: The Democrats seem oblivious to its power. And the GOP needn’t lift a finger for it to work. All Republicans have to do is sit back and watch 29-year-old Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez . . . exist.
AOC, as she’s better known, today exists largely in front of the cameras. In a few months she’s gone from an unknown New York bartender to the democratic socialist darling of the left and its media hordes. Her megaphone is so loud that she rivals Speaker Nancy Pelosi as the face of the Democratic Party. Republicans don’t know whether to applaud or laugh. Most do both.
For them, what’s not to love? She’s set off a fratricidal war on the left, with her chief of staff, Saikat Chakrabarti, this week slamming the “radical conservatives” among the Democrats holding the party “hostage.” She’s made friends with Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s Labour Party, who has been accused of anti-Semitism. She’s called the American system of wealth creation “immoral” and believes government has a duty to provide “economic security” to people who are “unwilling to work.” As a representative of New York, she’s making California look sensible.
On Thursday Ms. Ocasio-Cortez unveiled her vaunted Green New Deal, complete with the details of how Democrats plan to reach climate nirvana in a mere 10 years. It came in the form of a resolution, sponsored in the Senate by Massachusetts’ Edward Markey, on which AOC is determined to force a full House vote. That means every Democrat in Washington will get to go on the record in favor of abolishing air travel, outlawing steaks, forcing all American homeowners to retrofit their houses, putting every miner, oil rigger, livestock rancher and gas-station attendant out of a job, and spending trillions and trillions more tax money. Oh, also for government-run health care, which is somehow a prerequisite for a clean economy.
It’s a GOP dream, especially because the media presented her plan with a straight face—as a legitimate proposal from a legitimate leader in the Democratic Party. Republicans are thrilled to treat it that way in the march to 2020, as their set-piece example of what Democrats would do to the economy and average Americans if given control. The Green New Deal encapsulates everything Americans fear from government, all in one bonkers resolution.
It is for starters, a massive plan for the government to take over and micromanage much the economy. Take the central plank, its diktat of producing 100% of U.S. electricity “through clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources” by 2030. As Ron Bailey at Reason has noted, a 2015 plan from Stanford envisioning the goal called for the installation of 154,000 offshore wind turbines, 335,000 onshore wind turbines, 75 million residential photovoltaic (solar) systems, 2.75 million commercial solar systems, and 46,000 utility-scale solar facilities. AOC has been clear it will be government building all this, not the private sector.
And that might be the easy part. According to an accompanying fact sheet, the Green New Deal would also get rid of combustion engines, “build charging stations everywhere,” “upgrade or replace every building in U.S.,” do the same with all “infrastructure,” and crisscross the nation with “high-speed rail.”
Buried in the details, the Green New Deal also promises government control of the most fundamental aspects of private life. The fact sheet explains why the resolution doesn’t call for “banning fossil fuels” or for “zero” emissions across the entire economy—at least at first. It’s because “we aren’t sure that we’ll be able to fully get rid of farting cows and airplanes that fast” (emphasis mine).
This is an acknowledgment that planes don’t run on anything but fossil fuel. No jet fuel, no trips to see granny. It’s also an acknowledgment that livestock produce methane, which has led climate alarmists to engage in “meatless Mondays.” AOC may not prove able to eradicate “fully” every family Christmas or strip of bacon in a decade, but that’s the goal.
Finally, the resolution is Democratic math at its best. It leaves out a price tag, and is equally vague on what kind of taxes would be needed to cover the cost. But it would run to tens of trillions of dollars. The fact sheet asserts the cost shouldn’t worry anyone, since the Federal Reserve can just “extend credit” to these projects! And “new public banks can be created to extend credit,” too! And Americans will get lots of “shared prosperity” from their “investments.” À la Solyndra.
At least some Democrats seem to be aware of what a danger this is, which is why Ms. Pelosi threw some cold water on the Green New Deal this week. They should be scared. Ms. Ocasio-Cortez is a freight train gaining speed by the day—and helping Republicans with every passing minute.
https://www-wsj-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/the-socialist-that-could-11549583738?amp_js_v=a2&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE=#referrer=https://www.google.com&_tf=From %1$s&share=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-socialist-that-could-11549583738
- Jul 19, 2012
- 23,023
- 33,725
Word what was the power source back then vs now
the common factor is time. Combustion engines have changed over time just like electric vehicles. I'm all for fuel driven vehicles cuz I'm not a fan of electric but to act like electric cars are a lost cause don't eem make sense.
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
same thing it is now, natural gas/coal/petroleum.
- Jul 19, 2012
- 23,023
- 33,725
I meant for electric vehicles
- Dec 29, 2003
- 9,894
- 34,438
Respect.
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
if they were that viable they would've been wide spread mass adoption and mass appeal already...100 years....
its literally da same story 100+ years later.
- May 25, 2004
- 30,355
- 40,944
I’ll give ninja this though and I saw wr mention it too.
The process of mining for the batteries is ******.
You destroy the earth to make them then you destroy the earth to dispose of them.
Just like everything it’s got issues.
In the Midwest bio diesel is huge. It takes 3 gallons of diesel to make one gallon of bio, then it freezes when it’s cold. Straight stupidity.
The process of mining for the batteries is ******.
You destroy the earth to make them then you destroy the earth to dispose of them.
Just like everything it’s got issues.
In the Midwest bio diesel is huge. It takes 3 gallons of diesel to make one gallon of bio, then it freezes when it’s cold. Straight stupidity.
January will mark the 40th month of consecutive year-over-year monthly sales gains for plug-in vehicles.
Get with the times or get left behind...simple as that
Get with the times or get left behind...simple as that
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
*cough* electric vehicle market share is laughable *cough*
Sales of plug-in passenger cars achieved a 2.1% market share of new car sales in 2018, up from 1.3% in 2017, and 0.86% in 2016.[5][6][7]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car_use_by_country
- May 25, 2004
- 30,355
- 40,944
My issues with electric cars;
Child and slave labor mining cobalt
The process of mining is toxic
What do you do with the old batteries?
There is a finite supply in the earth.
Child and slave labor mining cobalt
The process of mining is toxic
What do you do with the old batteries?
There is a finite supply in the earth.
- Jul 19, 2012
- 23,023
- 33,725
yeah, what powers electric vehicles in da united States again?
Batteries b. They were low power and couldn't be recharged 100 years ago.
I don't even know what your point is
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
and technology isn't gonna get better because lithium has already basically been maxed out in capacity, which is also a rare earth material.
All fair points.
You a scientist?
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
So, the answer was "no".anyone who follows da automotive world knows this stuff.
- Aug 1, 2004
- 70,049
- 24,223
what does that have to do with lithium batteries being limited in that capacity?
Musk also admitted that the current design and chemistry of the battery means this is quite close to the theoretical limits that it can achieve.
https://theconversation.com/teslas-...r-limit-heres-how-they-could-go-further-64765
