brenthutch

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    10,335

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    33

  • Feedback

    0%

Posts posted by brenthutch

  1. · Edited by brenthutch

    23 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

    And, as ever, you missed the point entirely. Protecting a nice lady from being persecuted for not wearing an burka isn't wrong just because 12 morons are going to try to beat your ass for your effort.

    FIFY

  2. · Edited by brenthutch

    2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

    You didn't get the point. To be clear, as I've posted here, I think the whole rush to save the world from CO2 is doomed precisely because of China, India, Brazil, Republicans, and on and on and on. If it could be done it's certainly worth the expense but I am not holding my breath or my fun.

    And yet we are spending trillions on a path to nowhere. One must ask oneself who will benefit from this futile endeavor? The answer is the friends and cronies of those pushing this agenda. Michael Mann went from a low-level meteorologist to a multimillionaire celebrity once he concocted the “hockey stick,” which has subsequently been rejected as junk science. However, once the gravy train started rolling, more and more hopped on board and now everyone from politics to media to academia is now feeding at the trough of climate alarmism. Anyone who can not see this is either naive, stupid or in on it.

     

  4. On 4/20/2024 at 7:27 AM, lippy said:

    So, first you spend about 4 years telling everybody that Tesla will never pan out...then, in December 2023 you said: "I was wrong about Tesla, full stop" so I guess you were at least acknowledging their successes.

    Now, you're back holding up Tesla's decline and claiming you'd called it all along.  Make up your mind man...for those of us playing the home game, it's hard to keep up!

    I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken 

  5. · Edited by brenthutch

    1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

    No shit, Sherlock. That’s the problem not the potential or viability of renewables. By that logic why fight crime at home when Haiti is so ridden with theft, drugs, and murder?

    Imagine you are the emperor of the planet and your task is to reduce global crime. You will not make a dent by over policing Switzerland while ignoring Haiti. The U.N. Says we need to achieve Net Zero by 2050. With China and India building hundreds of coal plants, with a lifespan of 40 to 50 years, it ain’t going to happen.

  6. 15 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

     

    spacer.png

    "Pennsylvania isn’t part of a big, regional program to slash carbon emissions, but coal plants are closing anyway... Pennsylvania’s four other major coal plants are expected to close or stop burning coal by the end of 2028,...The closures reflect the economic and regulatory headwinds facing coal nationwide, which has struggled to compete against cheap natural gas and renewable energy. "

    Coal, Pennsylvania and the dark ages. Some things never change.

    PA closes one coal plant per year (average) meanwhile China builds two coal plants per week and India is not far behind.

     

  7. · Edited by brenthutch

    52 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

    Energy transition will never be total and complete. I guess that means a win for you, and the people who still use kerosene lamps, too

    Wendy P.

    It won’t even begin until the growth of renewables outpace growth in demand which is projected to explode.

    From Newsmax

    “According to estimates in The Wall Street Journal, data centers which accounted for about 2.5% of U.S. electricity in 2022 are projected to consume more than 20% by 2030.

    That power is needed around-the-clock 24/7, competing with nighttime EV recharging demands, particularly when there is no sunlight, and the wind isn’t blowing.

    AEP Ohio warns that new data centers and Intel’s planned $20 billion chip plant will strain its grid as well because chip factories and data centers can consume 100 times more power than typical businesses.”

  9. From Hydroreview.com 4/8/24
    “The world is burning more fossil fuels than ever before, global energy-related emissions are increasing, and ever-growing energy demand is not being fully met by renewables”

    If renewables can’t even keep pace with the growth in demand, they sure as hell won’t be able replace fossil fuels in time to “save the planet”

    You guys must live in the land of Magical Thinking.

     

  12. · Edited by brenthutch

    “In February 2024, the electric vehicle (EV) producer reduced its salaried workforce by 10%. Yesterday, it announced plans to lay off even more workers.”

    I guess they are giving them a rest before the inevitable massive transition to EV.

  18. “The decline in EV sales in the market was particularly pronounced among European automakers, as reported by data from the KBA, Germany’s federal motor transport authority. Citroen, Jaguar, Polestar, and Volkswagen all saw a 30 percent reduction in EV sales in Q1 2024 compared to the previous year. Meanwhile, Porsche, Peugeot, Mini, Fiat, and DS experienced even larger contractions, with reductions exceeding 40 percent.”

    From Carscoops.com

  19. 21 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

    - or not.

     

    We don’t have 12 years to save the climate. We have 14 months,” the now-defunct ThinkProgress predicted 43 months ago.

    Former French prime minister Laurent Fabius warned 3,239 days ago that the international community had only “500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

    Earlier, in 2009, Gordon Brown, the U.K.’s prime minister at the time, said we had “fewer than fifty days to save our planet from catastrophe.”

    Also in 2009, former vice president Al Gore declared that “there is a 75% chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years.”

    In 2013, mid-melt, the Guardian ran the following headline: “US Navy predicts summer ice-free Arctic by 2016.”

    The ice is still there.

    “NASA Scientist: We’re Toast,” reads the headline of an Associated Press report from 2008.

    In 2007, the IPCC predicted the Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035. The U.N.’s chief climate science body retracted the claim in 2010, explaining the prediction wasn’t based on any peer-reviewed data, but on a media interview with a scientist conducted in 1999.

    In 2006, Gore claimed that unless world leaders took “drastic measures” to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions, Earth would surpass the “point of no return” in ten years — a “true planetary emergency,” he called it.

    The year 2016 came and went, and now we’re being told the early 2030s are the real point of no return.

    The Guardian, citing a “secret report,” warned in 2004 that “major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020.”

    “U.N. Predicts Disaster If Global Warming Not Checked,” the AP reported in 1989.

    The report’s opening line reads, “senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”

  20. 26 minutes ago, olofscience said:

    You predicted 2023 to "not even reach the top five" warmest years.

     

    Instead, it smashed all records. Interesting how you're now dissing NASA's predictive capability :rofl:

    But I also predicted there would be record coal production. I predicted CO2 emissions would continue to increase. (So much for “energy transition”) I predicted floods, droughts, hurricanes and wildfires would remain within historical range. I predicted Polar bears would continue to thrive. I predicted global food production would remain at or near record levels (thanks CO2). I predicted the Polar ice cap would remain year round. And I predicted ICE vehicles sales would continue to outpace EVs. (I know that one hurts Olof[cry]). All in all I think I did pretty well.

  21. 1 hour ago, BIGUN said:

    That's called "Climate."

    They're talking about "Climate Change" which leads to "Global Warming." 

    You do realize that a PERMANENT 1 degree change would have a significant impact on the world?

    The attached link is IMO the single best reference for those who "wish" to understand more of the basics of this impact.

    https://climate.nasa.gov/news/2865/a-degree-of-concern-why-global-temperatures-matter/   

    Brent, I'm not going to get into a long circular argument with you. At this point, you have enough info to re-orient your position and pick a new azimuth - or not,

    I hope you know the difference between projections and observations.

    Other than a slight warming, none of those predictions have panned out.

     

  22. 5 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

    Changes in tilt angle.

    If that was the case, why did the southern hemisphere have extensive glaciation at the same time?  
     

    “Based on changes in position of ice sheet margins dated via terrestrial cosmogenic nuclides and radiocarbon dating, growth of ice sheets in the southern hemisphere commenced 33,000 years ago and maximum coverage has been estimated to have occurred sometime between 26,500 years ago[1] and 20,000 years ago.”

  24. 46 minutes ago, CygnusX-1 said:

    News Flash to no one except for Brent - Tesla has been a very volatile stock ever since they started making waves in the auto industry:

    image.png.64bf62221c58e076d83566843e360ade.png

    I guess I could rewrite your narrative as, "Tesla stock now up 9,705 percent!"

    Shall we compare that to say Ford over the same time period?

     

    Ford is also losing money on EVs. Let’s compare to an automobile company that didn’t buy into the EV craze….say…Toyota

    Toyota Motor Corp
    233.81 USD+96.06 (69.74%)past yea