Tastes sour, but still gotta eat when there is no food.

Nationalizing the oil companies will be the final transformation of the GOP into a Venezuela style kleptocracy. If you think the current issues are bad, and they are bad, wait until they get a trillion dollar industry as their personal piggy bank.

I am well aware of the safety of nuclear power instead of fossil fuels. That doesn’t take away from the mass hysteria that led to a stoppage of new plant construction globally.

Nice to blame the bogeyman, but society has responsibility on this one.

You must have forgotten about three mile island… virtually all environmental groups came out anti-nuclear. Still mostly that way.

Residential and transportation represents 53% of energy consumption. Add in commercial use and the total is 65%. Industry is not dominating the numbers.

All of these uses could be dramatically decreased simply by drilling less, digging less, and increasing the costs of fossil fuels via taxes. It’s the simple answer that nobody wants to hear. Everyone wants to just blame an evil corporation instead of making moderate sacrifices.

How many left leaning democrats criticized Biden’s tapping into the strategic oil reserve to lower gas prices instead of celebrating the decreased global oil supply?

384 going up to 784. Pandemic certainly was the cause of the drop during Trump. The key point is that Biden is enthusiastic about drilling, with equal fervor as any Republican President.

His poll numbers will melt if he came out and said he wanted to double gas prices to fight climate change.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109332/us-oil-and-gas-rigs-in-use-covid19/#:~:text=Oil%20rigs%20are%20the%20most,with%20roughly%20106%20gas%20rigs.

Oil drilling has doubled under Biden. He has done just enough to greenwash his administration, but doesn’t make a real impact in this regards.

Lots of other very important reasons to vote D, but not germane to this sub.

More depressing is that a vast majority of Redditors are unwilling to make any sacrifices in order to fight climate change. They want the burden to be placed on some bogeyman.

I got to witness a small glacier dam burst in the Wind River range of Wyoming. The amount of power released by even a small lake is unfathomable. It sounded like a 12-lane highway even from a mile away. Can’t imagine the destruction of a big glacier lake.

It happens. Root cause is the world (USA) should move on from pounds and switch to SI. I am so tired from the headaches these dual systems create.

Divide by 2.2 instead of multiplying. Gives 1100 kg of protein per hectare. Article is off by a factor of two. Not surprising for this kind of “study”.

China is the largest capitalist society. The economic model bears little semblance to communism except for complicated property ownership schemes.

If I had $10B and wanted to build a mega factory, it will get built faster in China compared to anywhere else in the world.

They did comparisons to just cannabis and oral by themselves and found the combination was more effective.

With 10b, you can pay other people to be healthy for you.

You have a job so you obviously are chasing after more money. If you only had 10B pounds, you could enjoy your football and get paid to own a team.

That, my friend, is why you are poor. Check out the comparison between sports teams vs stock market over the last three decades:

https://mercercapital.com/article/investors-view-major-league-sports/

So windy with that double lenticular cloud! Such a beautiful peak.

ManU has had a 15% annual growth rate from 2005. Compare that to 9% for the S&P 500 over the same time period. Better deal than Twitter according to my maths.

Could the value go from 7B pounds to 100B pounds in the next 20 years? Absolutely.

You are a very optimistic person. For the sake of the planet, I hope you are right.

I am old and cynical for many valid reasons.

Here is a better comparison of the current policies that will result in a +2.7C gain by the end of the century vs the unrealistic promises that we will almost immediately drop CO2 emissions in half.

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/paris-global-climate-change-agreements

Yes, if we can dramatically cut greenhouse gas emissions, we will have less greenhouse gas emissions. They also state that it isn’t a likely scenario as countries over promised and are under delivering, especially for the Big-3: USA, China, and India. You don’t read many science papers, do you?

There is no popular support for drastic cuts of fossil fuels in those countries. Witness the number of drilling rigs doubling under Biden and threats to punish Saudi Arabia for their slowdown of production. See India allying with Russia to save a little bit on crude oil. Observe China and their rapid growth and huge number of new power plants to supply the enormous middle class.

The pledges aren’t worth the paper they are written on.

Did you even read that Nature Paper? It does not support your conclusion. Actually none of your links support your conclusions as realistic.

CO2 emissions from energy production has grown 7x in the last 70 years at a near linear pace with only a minor deviation due to Covid. We will have far more emissions as the 80% of the population living in developing regions gain the wealth of the developed nations. I call BS on your citations.

Few countries are willing to sacrifice growth to promote a better earth. Witness how Americans were united in Saudi Arabia cutting oil production by 2% of global supply. Even the most fervent anti-climate change activists on Reddit were upset and felt now was not a good time to reduce emissions. It is never a good time and selfishness trumps altruism.

The promises made by politicians are empty lies.

I don’t see Americans reducing the amount the amount of tasty animals we eat. 250 lbs/pp/year is beyond excessive, leading to massive health issues.

We love to point fingers at countries with less than half that amount of per capita consumption.