Saudi Arabia Ditching America for China

[Serenity]

It won’t collapse anything. It forces change.

I know you're a very progressive dude, I am too, but I'm also reasonable. $20/gal in the short term absolutely would collapse almost everything, if not collapse there would be insane inflation which is about the same as collapse. Do you have any idea how much we still depend on fossil fuels to maintain our current quality of life? I urge you to look it up, life would be sh!t for everyone if we quickly cut it out or severely jack up prices.

Key word is transition. None of this is impossible or even improbable to accomplish. Just needs the will to be done.

Yes, the key word is transition, I also believe it's possible. However, your focus is entirely wrong. It's not a matter of will, it's a matter of time. This transition is already occurring, but it will take a lot of time. It needs a MASSIVE amount of infrastructure changes, those will be time consuming and expensive to make happen, it will take many more years to practically go green.

We could cut fossil fuels today, but it would send humanity back several decades and probably the population too. The keyword is transition, it takes time, a lot of time. I'd give it a couple of decades from now, maybe a little more.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I know you're a very progressive dude, I am too, but I'm also reasonable. $20/gal in the short term absolutely would collapse almost everything, if not collapse there would be insane inflation which is about the same as collapse. Do you have any idea how much we still depend on fossil fuels to maintain our current quality of life? I urge you to look it up, life would be sh!t for everyone if we quickly cut it out or severely jack up prices.


Yes, the key word is transition, I also believe it's possible. However, your focus is entirely wrong. It's not a matter of will, it's a matter of time. This transition is already occurring, but it will take a lot of time. It needs a MASSIVE amount of infrastructure changes, those will be time consuming and expensive to make happen, it will take many more years to practically go green.

We could cut fossil fuels today, but it would send humanity back several decades and probably the population too. The keyword is transition, it takes time, a lot of time. I'd give it a couple of decades from now, maybe a little more.

I do not disagree with any of this. I figured the point of the thread is more of a “what if?” than this actually happening. No one in the right mind thinks a 500% increase in fuel price is tenable. My only point was that an increase in fuel prices forces change in a direction that I consider to be positive. Less car dependency, better vehicles, less pollution, and less fat people. I think people should argue against the merits of that, rather than calling us naive and misinformed for stating it.

 

[EyeBRollin]

Obviously you've never been in the low/poverty class. Do you honestly think they'll just be happy walking to work that's miles and miles away?

Obviously you don’t know American history. How did people find work before the interstate highway system?

People will all look for closer jobs to home, and there's only so many of those...

Why yes, they will! And no, actually the opposite… If the closest mechanic is 30 miles away, it means your town needs some more mechanics…

People will not walk to work for minimum wage. They'll resort to crime.

They will if the minimum wage is livable. If it is eat shvt $7.25 / hour, of course they’d resort to crime.

 

[zekko]

Obviously you don’t know American history. How did people find work before the interstate highway system?

You forgot we're talking about millennials here

 

[Billtx49]

Obviously you don’t know American history. How did people find work before the interstate highway system?

If I remember right, the first automobile was made in 1886. It’s taken over 100 years to get to the vehicles we have now, but now citing bogus climate change, some want us to change everything in 20 years time or less, starting Now.

It’s how I define insanity……

 

[EyeBRollin]

If I remember right, the first automobile was made in 1886. It’s taken over 100 years to get to where we are now, but now citing bogus climate change, some want us to change everything in 20 years, starting Now.

Climate change was accepted consensus about 30 years ago until fossil fuel oligarchs dumped billions of dollars into propaganda and bribing politicians. This has nothing to do with killing the automobile. Electric cars are still cars….

 

[Billtx49]

I believe the long term goal of "climate change" is to tax breathing.

Years ago the headcases were afraid of ‘global cooling’. When that didn’t happen, it was changed to ‘global warming’.
It’s Now Climate Change and we All be in Danger…

 

[EyeBRollin]

I believe the long term goal of "climate change" is to tax breathing.

Almost 200 nations on earth are in on a global effort to tax breathing?

….come on bruh

 

[Stuffnu]

Acid Rain - send money
Ozone Depletion - send money
Global Warming - send money
Global Change - send money
Climate Emergency - send money

There is no doubt we are polluting this planet, but I will scrutinize intent when billions of dollars are being paid out by the low & middle class to subsidize green initiatives when China and other despots continue to get a free pass.
Don’t fool yourself, alarmists are highly profiting from the escalating titles used above while monopolizing lithium, nickel and other mineral deposits required for batteries.
Fossil fuels will not go away, despite how much we wish…
Yes! We need to continue to do our part, but you do this by education, awareness and other means to incentivize reduction - not by forcing it. Higher prices will simply make there citizens poorer, more dependent and less competitive to countries that don’t give a crap about the environment.

 

[Serenity]

No one in the right mind thinks a 500% increase in fuel price is tenable.

I just did the math and now I'm laughing. When converted from freedom units (so I can understand it) $20/gal is about a 100% increase from the prices we've experienced in Norway lately, tax included.

Again though, it's one thing to force change, that's already happening, but nobody wants to take credit for choking civilization to death over it. It WILL take a lot of time. The force is there, it's just too slow to be perceptible by most humans, it's happening though.

Do not forget that we are NOT saving the planet, the planet will do just fine without us on it even if it was a flaming ball of magma, we are saving ourselves. You gotta be really careful about how restrictive you are if you have the power to decide policy, going too hard will cause more damage than good.

 

[Billtx49]

Do not forget that we are NOT saving the planet, the planet will do just fine without us on it

Yep, Earth survived the dinosaur age and all their methane gas released back then, even tho seemingly intelligent people b|tch about cow farts now.
The Main thing I don’t get is the oil labeling of fossil fuels. It don’t come from decayed dino’s, it’s way too deep…

 

[EyeBRollin]

Do not forget that we are NOT saving the planet, the planet will do just fine without us on it even if it was a flaming ball of magma, we are saving ourselves. You gotta be really careful about how restrictive you are if you have the power to decide policy, going too hard will cause more damage than good.

Yes. There are a lot of humans that are apathetic to the survival of humanity. This really becomes a discussion about the merits of incrementalism vs radical change. In a democratic context, incrementalism is more like pre-negotiation. It hasn’t sufficiently advanced the climate change mitigation outcome. (I.e. I will only get $50. Instead of asking for $100 I’ll be practical. The $50 then gets negotiated down to $20. “Better than nothing.”)

 

[Serenity]

Yep, Earth survived the dinosaur age and all their methane gas released back then, even tho seemingly intelligent people b|tch about cow farts now.

Yeah, the cows aren't a concern. If anything it's a diversion created by the large industries who dump the majority of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and contributing the most to the climate issue. They have everything to gain from people focusing on these small ridiculous things while they keep spewing out absolutely massive amounts unnoticed, that's why you see oil companies and such support seemingly green technology. People would be enraged if they realized we're compromising for their sakes.

Cows are a part of the carbon cycle, oil has been removed from that cycle long enough for life to evolve to adapt to it.

The Main thing I don’t get is the oil labeling of fossil fuels. It don’t come from decayed dino’s, it’s way too deep…

You are correct, being decayed dinosaurs is a massive simplification. It's mainly plankton and algae that died, settled to the bottom, over time got buried and subjected to pressure to decay into oil. The only thing it has in common with dinosaurs is being from around the same time age. It's deep because those areas were already deep being under water at that time.

Yes. There are a lot of humans that are apathetic to the survival of humanity. This really becomes a discussion about the merits of incrementalism vs radical change. In a democratic context, incrementalism is more like pre-negotiation. It hasn’t sufficiently advanced the climate change mitigation outcome. (I.e. I will only get $50. Instead of asking for $100 I’ll be practical. The $50 then gets negotiated down to $20. “Better than nothing.”)

What would be sufficient? What should have been done differently considering the available technologies through those times? I'm sure some things could have been done better, but I'm also sure there would still be a lot of people unsatisfied until everything is perfect.

 

[Xenom0rph]

Lol at anyone who doesn't realize that the Paris Climate Accord is just a big carbon tax scheme.

 

[Kotaix]

Key word is transition. None of this is impossible or even improbable to accomplish. Just needs the will to be done.

Which is fine if the world isn't about to explode into war, you're not about to lose the reserve currency, or destroying the purchasing power of the consumer by massive inflation.

 

[Billtx49]

Which is fine if the world isn't about to explode into war, you're not about to lose the reserve currency, or destroying the purchasing power of the consumer by massive inflation.

All those items make citizens more dependent on government ……
Coincidence?

 

[EyeBRollin]

What would be sufficient? What should have been done differently considering the available technologies through those times? I'm sure some things could have been done better, but I'm also sure there would still be a lot of people unsatisfied until everything is perfect.

People will always be unsatisfied. Even though people bvtch and moan, mandates do work. Mandates got people to wear masks. Got people vaccinated. It’s the same with climate change. California is the first US state to ban the sale of new gasoline powered cars in 2035. People will bvtch and complain, but life will go on.

 

[Stuffnu]

If anything it's a diversion created by the large industries who dump the majority of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and contributing the most to the climate issue. They have everything to gain from people focusing on these small ridiculous things while they keep spewing out absolutely massive amounts unnoticed, that's why you see oil companies and such support seemingly green technology

Spot on.
With the power of social media, we can easily report and punitize large polluters as consumers Thats how you force change. Instead, we’re divided and misguided on who should pay the bill while fighting over plastic straws (literally).

 

[Serenity]

People will always be unsatisfied. Even though people bvtch and moan, mandates do work. Mandates got people to wear masks. Got people vaccinated. It’s the same with climate change. California is the first US state to ban the sale of new gasoline powered cars in 2035. People will bvtch and complain, but life will go on.

I'm more a supporter of good education than to force idiots to comply to stuff they don't understand.

Funny you mention California will phase out fossil fuel cars by 2035, in my country that goal is less than 3 years from now. A few people do b!tch and complain about it, but well over 50% of new cars sold in Norway are already electric. As I understand it, California is also littered with Teslas already, 2035 might be a bit too slow.

 

[EyeBRollin]

I'm more a supporter of good education than to force idiots to comply to stuff they don't understand.

Great in theory. Does not work in practice. People either won’t understand or don’t want to. That is the human condition.

Funny you mention California will phase out fossil fuel cars by 2035, in my country that goal is less than 3 years from now. A few people do b!tch and complain about it, but well over 50% of new cars sold in Norway are already electric. As I understand it, California is also littered with Teslas already, 2035 might be a bit too slow.

With that being said, California is the first state to adopt it. Usually the rest of the coastal states follow not too far behind. For cars, California has had stricter emissions standards than the rest of the USA. A bunch of the states in the northeast now use California emission standards rather than Federal standards.