โJul-17-2019 11:34 PM
โAug-21-2019 08:13 PM
โAug-21-2019 08:05 PM
philh wrote:
No way China is using more coal... their use of BEV has increased substantially and continuing to grow. BEV's don't use coal.
Almost typed that with a straight face.
โAug-21-2019 06:26 PM
โAug-21-2019 06:24 PM
โAug-21-2019 02:15 PM
pianotuna wrote:
Hi Phil,
Hence the need for a solar powered RV.
In the last year the only "free" dumpsite in town (Regina, SK) has been paved over.
The local Husky (gas) station has permanently closed theirs.
The only "year round" Campground now wants $40 for a dump and fill up with water.
I'd say I live in a pretty RV unfriendly location.
โAug-21-2019 01:35 PM
pnichols wrote:Like the FEMA trailers?
I suspect that RVs will be real popular when the first and final - or next to the first and final - world catastrophe occurs. Already thousands, or hundreds of thousands(?), folks full time live in RVs. Just wait until the rest of us can no longer live in our homes/apartments/tents due to the catastrophe ... RVs may be priceless, then, if they have enough fuel left in their tanks to somehow escape the affects of the catastrophe.
โAug-21-2019 01:29 PM
โAug-21-2019 01:26 PM
MEXICOWANDERER wrote:joebedford wrote:
The statements in your clicky may be true, but Radio Free Asia is hardly an unbiased source.
The coal in china is a rather low-grade of bituminous. I sm going to end my participation in this discussion by stating the following...
Recreational Vehicles are considered by many in Congress to be the mortal enemy of a green society. Their evil eye has not fully focused on this yet. When the attacks come, it will be in the form of punitive taxes. How would you like a thousand dollar energy surtax on the purchase price? Or a thirty dollar a day tax on USFS campground stays?
radical congresspeople want RVs to disappear. They will legislate them out of existence. They do not RV -- all they care about is their world of wacky ideas. And it is not based on intelligence.
The quote in red above is a snippet from Wikipedia. I thought it to be economically concise. It's in agreement with dozens and dozens of USA studies, world studies and Chinese admissions which china desperately wants to suppress.
"Some people are more equal than others"
If you disagree
"Take the midnight train to Tokyo or Brussels"
We done
โAug-21-2019 09:35 AM
joebedford wrote:
The statements in your clicky may be true, but Radio Free Asia is hardly an unbiased source.
โAug-21-2019 09:05 AM
Economics will dictate the changes more than political will.
โAug-21-2019 06:46 AM
โAug-21-2019 05:43 AM
free radical wrote:MEXICOWANDERER wrote:
China is using m-o-r-e coal than ever before.
China doesnt use more coal then ever stop BSing.
โAug-20-2019 10:00 PM
โAug-20-2019 09:22 PM
โAug-20-2019 06:21 PM
MEXICOWANDERER wrote:
And Russia and China BOTH weaseled out by setting THEIR OWN timeline for compliance. The USA refused and withdrew.
Action, and not B.S.
Neither country has done squat with or without joining the accord.
And toss in Brazil and equatorial Africa for ignorance in defending their role in rainforest depletion.
"Oh because your country is the wealthiest it has to do more. Much much more" is the height of hypocrisy.
But you have to get into the minutes of the meetings to see this.
Yet the US has reduced emissions than any other country. But people who ***** about the USA refusal are the first to pull out their pie charts and chortle over the gross reduction in fossil fuel reliance for the production of electricity. Take Russia and their openness with a giant catastrophe with nuclear weapons radiation leak -- a class III event.
China is using m-o-r-e coal than ever before. Clearcutting has increased on the equator. And I see no meaningful effort at reforestation.
One for you and two for me. Two for you and seven for me doesn't cut it.