Greta Thunberg

mmj_uk said:
High concentrations of CO2 are used in greenhouses to speed up the growth of plants but the greens and climate emergency alarmists want zero emissions, if plants were to become sentient the equivalent would be like them getting together and agreeing to zero emissions on oxygen. Photosynthesis forms the cycle of life on Earth.

Do we need to cut down on other pollution? yes, do we need to reduce deforestation? yes. but the "climate emergency" scare due to CO2 is laughable, plants will be loving and thriving on any increase in CO2 and they will produce more oxygen as a result.
Click to expand...

I don't want to drive a diesel car, I don't want to drive a gasoline car.
It is damaging for our economy because these fuels are super expensive, make all goods and services super expensive, and ultimately rise the poverty around the world.
What we need is green, clean and cheap basic energy.
 
mmj_uk said:
High concentrations of CO2 are used in greenhouses to speed up the growth of plants but the greens and climate emergency alarmists want zero emissions, if plants were to become sentient the equivalent would be like them getting together and agreeing to zero emissions on oxygen. Photosynthesis forms the cycle of life on Earth.

Do we need to cut down on other pollution? yes, do we need to reduce deforestation? yes. but the "climate emergency" scare due to CO2 is laughable, plants will be loving and thriving on any increase in CO2 and they will produce more oxygen as a result.
Click to expand...

Stop talking rubbish, this is just a line peddled by climate deniers.
 
200sols said:
Stop talking rubbish, this is just a line peddled by climate deniers.
Click to expand...
He is not talking rubbish, empirical/observational evidence shows climate sensitivity to CO2 to be low, only models are used to show it being high.
Show me otherwise or it is you talking rubbish.
 
altus said:
He is not talking rubbish, empirical/observational evidence shows climate sensitivity to CO2 to be low, only models are used to show it being high.
Show me otherwise or it is you talking rubbish.
Click to expand...

Haha. Words do fail me sometimes, there is no hope.
 
Average petrol/diesel price is 125.9p. 50 litres cost around 6,295p. This is your price for max 1000 km drive, depending on your car fuel consumption can be much less.
63 pounds for 1000 km, plus annual taxes, fees, insurance, repair fees, oil change fees, around 40,000p for new tyres, etc, and it becomes extremely expensive to drive a car.
 
4K8KW10 said:
I don't want to drive a diesel car, I don't want to drive a gasoline car.
It is damaging for our economy because these fuels are super expensive, make all goods and services super expensive, and ultimately rise the poverty around the world.
What we need is green, clean and cheap basic energy.
Click to expand...

That statement needs explaining, because demonstrably fossil fuels are not expensive and that is the reason why they are so widely used and why global aviation and global capitalism are possible. If fossil fuels were genuinely expensive there would be no mass production, no mass transportation the overwhelming majority of us would live and die with fewer belongings near where we were born.

Mitigation is never discussed in the Climate Change argument, what kind of economy do we need to maintain should the most alarmist predictions come true. The outcome necessary to maintain the something similar to the current global economy is also never discussed the hair shirt brigade pretend windmills will solve everything and some new technology will fill the gaps. Sensible discussion of achievable solutions is lost in the pursuit of fantasy ones.
 
Nasher said:
Actually its true. People also inject Co2 in to fish tanks to grow plants bigger and faster :p
Click to expand...

No, his post was designed to convey the message that CO2 = good because plants need it to grow. Any benefits to plants will be outweighed by the negative affects of climate change. Its a climate denier trick to only show half the message.
 
PlacidCasual said:
That statement needs explaining, because demonstrably fossil fuels are not expensive and that is the reason why they are so widely used and why global aviation and global capitalism are possible. If fossil fuels were genuinely expensive there would be no mass production, no mass transportation the overwhelming majority of us would live and die with fewer belongings near where we were born.

Mitigation is never discussed in the Climate Change argument, what kind of economy do we need to maintain should the most alarmist predictions come true. The outcome necessary to maintain the something similar to the current global economy is also never discussed the hair shirt brigade pretend windmills will solve everything and some new technology will fill the gaps. Sensible discussion of achievable solutions is lost in the pursuit of fantasy ones.
Click to expand...

How much does it cost to fully charge the battery of a Tesla Model 3 or VW ID.3?
I guess a tenth of the cost of petrol for the same mileage drive.

With electric transport, these costs will be significantly lower than simply keeping the use of fossil fuels.
 
4K8KW10 said:
Average petrol/diesel price is 125.9p. 50 litres cost around 6,295p. This is your price for max 1000 km drive, depending on your car fuel consumption can be much less.
63 pounds for 1000 km, plus annual taxes, fees, insurance, repair fees, oil change fees, around 40,000p for new tyres, etc, and it becomes extremely expensive to drive a car.
Click to expand...
The majority of that 125.9ppl as per your example is tax. Tax is imposed by government and is not a fuel cost. Tax revenue will need to be made up elsewhere or via other means such as road pricing when gasoline sales decline significantly.

Do your sums again with a product price of around 30ppl, and then compare with electricity. The cost is not massively different at all.
 
Jez said:
The majority of that 125.9ppl as per your example is tax. Tax is imposed by government and is not a fuel cost. Tax revenue will need to be made up elsewhere or via other means such as road pricing when gasoline sales decline significantly.

Do your sums again with a product price of around 30ppl, and then compare with electricity. The cost is not massively different at all.
Click to expand...

Well if people are spending less money on petrol and diesel, then that leaves room for a higher income tax rate, though preferably it should be flat by then and UBI administered.

There’s a lot we can do if we stop thinking in the past.
 
4K8KW10 said:
How much does it cost to fully charge the battery of a Tesla Model 3 or VW ID.3?
I guess a tenth of the cost of petrol for the same mileage drive.

With electric transport, these costs will be significantly lower than simply keeping the use of fossil fuels.
Click to expand...

Only because the tax is so high on petrol. The Govt cant afford to lose that tax income so they will recoup it somehow.
 
@4K8KW10

Electricity is 13p/kWh approx.
Petrol at the pump is 13p/kWh approx. But the ICE is only 40% efficient so yes petrol is more expensive. Change that to refinery price and it's down at 9p/kWh.

Electricity and fuel for cars are not great comparisons, electricity is subsidized to buggery at the moment and oil/petrol taxed likewise. Also electricity is made from fossil fuels at the moment. Doubly so if you want electricity when you need it. No flight, no electronic plastic crap from China, no food are just a few of the biggies that cheap fossil fuels have bought us and the per mile cost of the Tesla doesn't replace.
 
I find it rather amusing that 4K8KW10 is comparing a fuel plus heavy tax (as i say above, the calculations should be performed at a fuel rate at approx 30ppl product cost) and a tax free subsidised alternative which is only maintained at this level to encourage adoption.
 
StriderX said:
Well if people are spending less money on petrol and diesel, then that leaves room for a higher income tax rate, though preferably it should be flat by then and UBI administered.

There’s a lot we can do if we stop thinking in the past.
Click to expand...
Its interesting to wonder just how fuel duty will be replaced to reflect the differences in peoples' road usage.
 
I understand that the consumer price of diesel/petrol has very high part of it government taxes and fees, but you can produce the electricity for your electric vehicle with your own roof-top solar panels installation. At that point, it is your private thing, and the government will have no right to impose taxes on this private production.
Not to mention that you can do it secretly, so they never know.
 
4K8KW10 said:
I understand that the consumer price of diesel/petrol has very high part of it government taxes and fees, but you can produce the electricity for your electric vehicle with your own roof-top solar panels installation. At that point, it is your private thing, and the government will have no right to impose taxes on this private production.
Not to mention that you can do it secretly, so they never know.
Click to expand...
You dont need any smoke and mirrors with an EV. Electricity is cheap, virtually untaxed and by all accounts will remain so, as you cannot divert it for one use or another (remember, that offroad diesel for example attracts no fuel duty either). Producing power privately in the quantity required for an EV is not really something which most people without acres of land for a solar farm will ever achieve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom