Jump to content

The Clowns DON'T Have Enough Electricity As It Is, Yet:


Art From Coleman
 Share

Recommended Posts

Seems like the buffoons in the MEDIA have decided to overlook the recent brownouts, and the FORCED "rolling blackouts" that were in the 'news' just a couple of weeks ago.

https://www.npr.org/2022/09/23/1124511549/california-plans-to-phase-out-new-gas-heaters-by-2030

Quote

In its ongoing effort to slash ozone pollution, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) voted Thursday to ban the sale of new gas furnaces and water heaters beginning in 2030. Homes will be required to install zero-emissions alternatives, like electric heaters.

When they say "homes", will that affect the "tent cities" that the homeless 'live' in?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find most troubling about all deadlines for banning pretty much anything is that all the effort seems to be put into passing a ban with virtually no thought out into finding a viable solution first. 

  • Like 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Finney said:

is it a requirement to be stupid to live out there????

No, I know a few good people who live there. They are greatly outnumbered by stupid though as I have heard them attest to. To VT’s point though, a viable alternative would be nice before everyone is sitting in the dark wondering what happened. Of course some would argue that is the desired result of those making the decisions but what do I know...

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to be long term exposure to sea air makes you dumb as --ll. All the idiots running us down the path were from near the ocean.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Reichow7120 said:

Seems to be long term exposure to sea air makes you dumb as --ll. All the idiots running us down the path were from near the ocean.

Thats a chicken/egg situation. I think its more like penguins on the edge of a glacier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Reichow7120 said:

Seems to be long term exposure to sea air makes you dumb as --ll. All the idiots running us down the path were from near the ocean.

I came to that conclusion a few years ago. Something about salt air and common sense, cannot find in the same area generally.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ray54 said:

I came to that conclusion a few years ago. Something about salt air and common sense, cannot find in the same area generally.

And to think, back when I was in jr high (yes California was a state way back then), we almost moved out to Cottonwood, a little town near Mt Shasta IIRC. Redding might have been the nearest big town?

Seemed like it was pretty country up there in Northern Cali

Hang tough Ray!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the alternative were there and viable/more economic the issue would resolve its self. No need to force or ban anything. 

This is all over reach on a grand scale and the outcry should be huge.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems incorrect to me to classify natural gas as a fossil fuel. Landfill gas occurs within a few years. Waukesha has built engines in the recent past specifically to run on this fuel.... so there must be a substantial amount of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ray54 said:

I came to that conclusion a few years ago. Something about salt air and common sense, cannot find in the same area generally.

Kinda like oil and water. They don’t mix.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, zleinenbach said:

Serious question- 

how do they come up with how many tons of CO2 are produced by xyz?

 

Vodo magic? 🤷‍♂️

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Binderoid said:

Seems incorrect to me to classify natural gas as a fossil fuel. Landfill gas occurs within a few years. Waukesha has built engines in the recent past specifically to run on this fuel.... so there must be a substantial amount of it.

Here’s some info on landfill gas. It is different from natural gas. 
https://www.epa.gov/lmop/basic-information-about-landfill-gas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, iowaboy1965 said:

Vodo magic? 🤷‍♂️

The only reason I ask is a “ton” of CO2 is a **** of a lot of gas. 
I had seen a thing that was basically saying a tanker ship hauling crude over here produced a staggering amount of tons of co2. 
I guess I’m not smart enough to figure out where that all equates from

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, zleinenbach said:

Serious question- 

how do they come up with how many tons of CO2 are produced by xyz?

 

Here’s an article discussing how they arrive at emissions calculations.  It’s all math, some things are known to produce a certain amount of emissions. For instance it is a known quantity of emissions for each gallon of diesel that is burned. Other things, like cow farts, would be estimates. It seems to be a little fast and loose with calculations depending on estimates, plenty of room for stacking tolerances and getting different numbers it would seem. 
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/apr/04/carbon-footprint-calculated

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this page briefly, it seems to me that these calculations have no real basis and are footed in hypothetical and assumed variables that are drilled down so far it is next to impossible to pinpoint any inaccuracies. To further complicate that, any inaccuracies can be made accurate by simply moving slider on assumed variable.

now I agree mining stuff and transporting it and everything we do has an impact, but the way they are trying to quantify it is hog wash.

0607898F-7642-42F5-8F14-270CE083200A.png

AA6A8BF8-AB99-44EB-9E02-EBA9E985CD5F.png

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, vtfireman85 said:

What I find most troubling about all deadlines for banning pretty much anything is that all the effort seems to be put into passing a ban with virtually no thought out into finding a viable solution first. 

We have to pass it BEFORE we read it mentality….

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, vtfireman85 said:

What I find most troubling about all deadlines for banning pretty much anything is that all the effort seems to be put into passing a ban with virtually no thought out into finding a viable solution first. 

  And you know that they will be militant and diligent in enforcing it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zleinenbach said:

Serious question- 

how do they come up with how many tons of CO2 are produced by xyz?

 

In the case of combusting (oxidation reaction) hydrocarbons, it is chemistry math.  Hydrocarbons are just what the name says they are, molecules composed of hydrogen atoms attached to strings or rings of carbon atoms.  When hydrocarbons are subject to an oxidation reaction (fancy way of saying when they burn), the hydrogen reacts with the oxygen in the air to form water (H2O) and carbon reacts with the oxygen to form CO2.  A high efficiency natural gas or propane (both hydrocarbons) furnace will visibly show the water that is form as a product of combustion, as some of it condenses out of the combustion gases and has to be disposed of separately. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that has been mandated here in the armpit as well

The whole state government leans heavily to the left and they anything CA does is the greatest thing since sliced bread to them

All new construction will be all electric after 2030 

And I believe there is a time frame when the gas appliances can no longer be sold in the state so there is a sunset on grandfathered properties 

Here is the big issue we generate very little power in the Northeast  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get doing our best to improve what we are doing to the environment.  Fictitious numbers or not.  But like always, the person's in charge are making one heck of a nice cart before realizing they don't even have horse 😂😂

Mark

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...