No new DPs in California or 6 other states

[Firstime RVer]

That's a two way street. It's more than likely the ones objecting to an all or nothing approach to renewable energy and transition to electrical vehicles are advocates for drilling in the Arctic Wildlife Refuge, tearing down wind and solar infrastructure, building more coal burning power plants, and banning EV's.
There is a middle ground, trending to become the Alabama of the G7 isn't it.

Again, an extreme position. We have an existing system that can clearly be improved upon. Why do changes have to be so drastic or extreme?? There is no reason that i can see where we can't use existing technology to develop/improve the current situation, without "cutting off our nose to spite our face"

I don't know about you all but the frequency of power outages have increased in our "neck of the woods"! What's going to happen if everyone jumps on the EV band wagon?
We have a stressed electrical grid, that need serious work.

Why can't we plan a reasonable transition/improvement of existing systems to accept the changes at a reasonable pace instead of turning everyone's lives inside out.??

Just my $.02 FWIW

Safe travels and all the best.

 

[Firstime RVer]

Reminds me of an old song with the words:
"fools rush in where wise men fear to tread"

 

[tlmgcamp1]

I recall reading somewhere that China has discovered as they increased the "green" stuff, it was paying for itself with the reduced health costs.

While they still have a long way to go to get all their air pollution problems fixed, what they have done has helped a lot with the health issues.

-Don- Tucson, AZ

Given China's history v our history on environmental regulation, I would suspect that China's cleanest industries are still dirtier than our dirtiest. If they were as clean as us, they would obviously be healthier. However as we continue to pile on more and more environmental regulation, at some point the juice might not be worth the squeeze. That is a tough call when dealing with health issues but it is a reality for those footing the bill. For instance, we all now that there is a lot of nasty stuff floating about in the air. Everthing from allergens to viruses to pollutants. Does that justify changing the building codes to require everything to be sealed up like a bio-lab? All this stuff needs balance which is a concept that is sorely missed.

 

[DonTom]

Why can't we plan a reasonable transition/improvement of existing systems to accept the changes at a reasonable pace instead of turning everyone's lives inside out.??

I would say they are reasonable as is. CA has to be stricter because here we have millions of people crowded together. More people here than in any other state.

-Don- Turlock, CA (now polluting CA's air in my NV registered motorhome!)

 

[RayIN]

All this hullabalu ove EV's and associated infrastructure and we are burying humanity in trash. More and more land is covered with trash every day. Where will all the fire debris go? where did all the hurricane debris from the SE states go? This in addition to the daily hundreds of trash trucks dumping their loads of trash somewhere.
Meanwhile recycling efforts are curtailed or eliminated just because companies that buy trash - plastic, metal, paper, etc stopped paying city, county governments for each ton of said trash.
Three things sustain human life, air, water, land to grow food. The world needs to get it priorities in order; without one we can find ways survive, without all three humanity ceases to exist.

 

[DonTom]

without all three humanity ceases to exist.

That is the best thing that could happen for everything else that lives on earth!

-Don- Tulare, CA

 

[DonTom]

land to grow food.

It requires much less land today to grow the same amount of food in the past. That's why they are building so many homes in what used to be farmland.

I cannot say if that is a good idea or not. The real problem is this world has way too many people. The most destructive thing ever on earth is us!

-Don- Tulare, CA

 

[RayIN]

My point Don, is; this EV debate is only a very small part of saving our planet. Actually minor compared to the other 2 parts.
The land and food problem is why we are paying huge subsidies to large corporations farming 10's of thousands of acres of land to grow food.
Water; less than 3% of water on earth is drinkable, the rest is salt water=oceans.

 

[DonTom]

My point Don, is; this EV debate is only a very small part of saving our planet. Actually minor compared to the other 2 parts.

Sure, but every little bit helps.

OTOH, IMO, saving this planet from ourselves is a hopeless case.

-Don- Tulare, CA

 

[old RV guy]

It requires much less land today to grow the same amount of food in the past. That's why they are building so many homes in what used to be farmland.

I cannot say if that is a good idea or not. The real problem is this world has way too many people. The most destructive thing ever on earth is us!

-Don- Tulare, CA

Watched a documentary sometime way back about an Island in the Pacific that every 7-10 years or so would be overrun with a rat plague. It come to find out occurred just as a certain type tree would every 7-10 years produce an outsize crop of fruit. The rat population would multiply as the food source multiplied and shrink back to its normal size in a few years. The problem was the rats destroyed the farmers food crops in an effort to sustain the over population.
The same type phenomena has occurred on our planet, before nitrogen/ammonia synthesis type fertilizers were invented, food couldn't be mass produced in the quantities necessary to sustain population explosions like has occurred planet wide. The more food that is produced, the cheaper it becomes, the more people will multiply.
The problem however the Pentagon describes won't be like the rat plague competing for a dwindling food supply, but in our case humans due to climate change will compete for a dwindling supply of water and consequently food. It won't be farmers fields, it will be a scrum for sustainability between nations. When nations become desperate for sustainability as the Japanese saw themselves in the 20's, 30's and 40's last century, bad things will happen.
The Pentagon describes Climate Change, not China, not Russia as the greatest existential threat to the US.

 

[Sunnyfalls]

My point Don, is; this EV debate is only a very small part of saving our planet. Actually minor compared to the other 2 parts.
The land and food problem is why we are paying huge subsidies to large corporations farming 10's of thousands of acres of land to grow food.
Water; less than 3% of water on earth is drinkable, the rest is salt water=oceans.

Saving the planet isn't an issue at all...

Saving humanity is considered an issue by some humans...but the planet will be perfectly fine when humanity is gone, which is absolutely what will ultimately happen.

Science seeks the truth in all things with everything else not being significant. Political science and religion seeks the control of the masses to keep the Oligarchs rich and powerful with the truth not being significant at all.

 

[Adventurous Traveler]

The land and food problem is why we are paying huge subsidies to large corporations farming 10's of thousands of acres of land to grow food

Yet, to sustain food prices, both here and abroad, and to keep the large mega corporate farms profitable, the Federal Gov't pays farmers millions each year to either destroy crops or hold back on planting large swaths of acreage yearly. Everyone has heard of dairy farmers destroying thousands of gallons of milk to stabilize prices.

The Pentagon describes Climate Change, not China, not Russia as the greatest existential threat to the US

This is political propaganda promoted by the previous administration, and back to the Obama years in Washington.

 

[garyb1st]

This is political propaganda promoted by the previous administration, and back to the Obama years in Washington.

Is political propaganda possibly determined by your view of the issue?

 

[Adventurous Traveler]

No. Because, it was never used as a political weapon with prior administrations of both parties like it was with the most recently departed occupants of the White House, and as I mentioned the Obama administration.

Anyone who thinks climate change, a slow and natural process that has occurred over the lifespan of this planet is more of an immediate danger to living souls today, whether in the U.S. or globally, than Communist China and its goal of global dominance must be popping gummies in the Free State of California or Colorado.

 

[garyb1st]

No. Because, it was never used as a political weapon with prior administrations of both parties like it was with the most recently departed occupants of the White House, and as I mentioned the Obama administration.

Whether or not you believe it or view it as a political weapon, the vast majority of experts view climate change as real and not political. And while I agree it's an ongoing process, I believe the process is speeding up. I also prefer to go with what the vast majority of experts are saying and what I can see. Things like melting polar ice caps and rising ocean levels are increasing beyond anything typically seen over the past 100 years. This may be entirely related to things beyond our control but what's the downside of trying.

One other minor point. Do you think it's possible the current administration is using immigration as a political weapon?

 

[old RV guy]

Whether or not you believe it or view it as a political weapon, the vast majority of experts view climate change as real and not political. And while I agree it's an ongoing process, I believe the process is speeding up. I also prefer to go with what the vast majority of experts are saying and what I can see. Things like melting polar ice caps and rising ocean levels are increasing beyond anything typically seen over the past 100 years. This may be entirely related to things beyond our control but what's the downside of trying.

One other minor point. Do you think it's possible the current administration is using immigration as a political weapon?

Mark Twain said "Never argue with an idiot, they'll only drag you down to their level and beat you with experience".

 

[NY_Dutch]

No. Because, it was never used as a political weapon with prior administrations of both parties like it was with the most recently departed occupants of the White House, and as I mentioned the Obama administration.

Anyone who thinks climate change, a slow and natural process that has occurred over the lifespan of this planet is more of an immediate danger to living souls today, whether in the U.S. or globally, than Communist China and its goal of global dominance must be popping gummies in the Free State of California or Colorado.

97 percent of climate scientists agree that the earth is warming due to human activity. Every major scientific organization related to the climate – including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science – have issued statements explaining that greenhouse gas emissions are the major contributor to climate change."

Climate Change 101

What is your explanation for the rapid temperature rise since the beginning of the industrial age? The rise has been faster than any other time in world history.

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

 

[old RV guy]

97 percent of climate scientists agree that the earth is warming due to human activity. Every major scientific organization related to the climate – including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science – have issued statements explaining that greenhouse gas emissions are the major contributor to climate change."

Climate Change 101

What is your explanation for the rapid temperature rise since the beginning of the industrial age? The rise has been faster than any other time in world history.

View attachment 177879

http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm

The movie "Don't Look Up" is an analogical parody of the climate denier cult. Instead of a looming climate disaster a giant asteroid on a collision trajectory for earth is detected.....It becomes necessary both politically and economically to convince people the asteroid stories are a gigantic hoax orchestrated by corrupt astronomers. The funniest scene for me was when a pedestrian looks up in the sky and seeing the giant asteroid breaking into the atmosphere and just before all life on earth is extinguished goes, "those ****ers lied to us".

 

[rvlifer]

must be popping gummies in the Free State of California or Colorado.

Gummies cost more than $1 a piece. Far cheaper to smoke pot

 

[Firstime RVer]

Seen the smog in LA on numerous visits. Seen the smog in NY on numerous visits.
Seen the smog in New Delhi india in 3 visits.
Seen the smog in Seoul on numerous visits.
Saw the smog in Beijing on numerous trips.
LA looked like clear skies in comparison...
It seems to me we are the least of the climates problems.
Just my $.02 FWIW