irv

Yep, even some EV's that weren't involved in an accident are also catching fire. This lad had to kick out the windows because nothing worked, even opening the door. https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-tesla-driver-kicks-out-window-to-escape-car-fire-1.5914147

Some people are just ignorant and choose to remain so. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/oilseep.html#:~:text=Seeps occur when crude oil,places to observe oil behavior. https://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oil-and-chemical-spills/oil-spills/resources/what-are-natural-oil-seeps.html https://www.whoi.edu/know-your-ocean/ocean-topics/how-the-ocean-works/seafloor-below/natural-oil-seeps/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_seep Like the oil sands in Alberta, drilling/refining actually cleans these up but of course that is never mentioned.

Why the Left will cut Biden loose Unlike the Trump Administration’s successful four years, Biden’s tenure has been an utter disaster. https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/hanson-why-the-left-will-cut-biden-loose

They tried that here during Wynne's Liberal tenure. Install thermostats so "they" can control what they deem is necessary as far as heat and cooling go. They were also on a kick to get people to do things after hours/off peak, purchase energy efficient appliances, etc but when Wynne and the Liberals realized how much revenue they lost, people were handed whopping electrical bills to make up the difference. https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/wallace-hydro-customer-debt-and-disconnections-soar-under-kathleen-wynne https://www.macleans.ca/news/it-was-my-mistake-wynne-says-of-high-electricity-bills/

That's the left wing media for you. They lie right to people's faces yet some are too stupid to factcheck things to see if things are true or not. Watch this CNN reporter get owned. https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/06/23/watch-republican-arizona-governor-candidate-kari-lake-trashes-cnn-to-reporters-face/

Was she ever right about anything? Theresa Tam gets 22% pay raise: The jump to $324,000 a year was approved despite missteps including Tam’s 2020 announcement that COVID “is largely under control” in June of 2020 and her recommendation that Canadians use Kleenex to ward off infection. https://torontosun.com/news/national/theresa-tam-gets-22-pay-raise-report

You couldn't make this shit up if you tried. “I’m vaccinated. I’m doubly boosted. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, says his COVID-19 recovery is an “example” for the nation on the protection offered by vaccines and boosters. Now all the sheep will be running out to get Paxlovid while Fauci and company bank large on another alleged wonder drug. https://torontosun.com/news/world/fauci-says-hes-example-for-covid-19-vaccinations

Nah, that's fake news. Kerry really does care about the environment because I heard him say it on T.V.

Exactly how they want it. A nation full of sheep is much easier to fool and control than a nation full of wolves.

All the best to you going forward, Racer. Hoping it was caught on time.

Biden administration consults Tesla for guidance in renewable fuel policy reform Biden has set a target to make half of all new vehicles sold in 2030 zero-emissions vehicles. https://driving.ca/auto-news/industry/biden-administration-consults-tesla-for-guidance-in-renewable-fuel-policy-reform?_ga=2.60480365.1117641342.1656004624-575993262.1656004621&_gl=1*nyaoqm*_ga*NTc1OTkzMjYyLjE2NTYwMDQ2MjE.*_ga_H792QCFZPV*MTY1NjAwNDYyNC4xLjEuMTY1NjAwNDc5OS4zNw..

WEF founder: Must prepare for an angrier world.

Trudeau has a history of interfering in criminal matters, don't believe his denials this time. This is evidence of a government using a tragedy for their political agenda and interfering with a police investigation to do so. https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-trudeau-has-a-history-of-interfering-in-criminal-matters-dont-believe-his-denials-this-time

Inflation spikes to highest level since 1983, Trudeau government says they've done enough already. The monthly inflation rate for May was 7.7% up from 6.8% in April. The last time inflation was this high was January 1983. And Justin Trudeau was an 11-year-old living at 24 Sussex as his father ran the country, unsure how to deal with out-of-control inflation. https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/lilley-inflation-spikes-to-highest-level-since-1983-trudeau-government-says-theyve-done-enough-already

You forgot this tidbit from your 10 pg brainwashing IPCC article. Where do you idiots actually come from? Climate change, gender and equity Throughout, the chapter considers many dimensions of gender and equity in regard to climate change and the food system (Box 5.1). Climate change impacts differ among diverse social groups depending on factors such as age, ethnicity, ability/disability, sexual orientation, gender, wealth, and class (high confidence) (Vincent and Cull 2014 57 ; Kaijser and Kronsell 2014 58 ). Poverty, along with socio-economic and political marginalisation, cumulatively put women, children and the elderly in a disadvantaged position in coping with the adverse impacts of the changing climate (UNDP 2013 59 ; Skoufias et al. 2011 60 ). The contextual vulnerability of women is higher due to their differentiated relative power, roles, and responsibilities at the household and community levels (Bryan and Behrman 2013 61 ; Nelson et al. 2002 62 ). They often have a higher reliance on subsistence agriculture, which will be severely impacted by climate change (Aipira et al. 2017 63 ). Through impacts on food prices (Section 5.2.3.1) poor people’s food security is particularly threatened. Decreased yields can impact nutrient intake of the poor by decreasing supplies of highly nutritious crops and by promoting adaptive behaviours that may substitute crops that are resilient but less nutritious (Thompson et al. 2012 64 ; Lobell and Burke 2010 65 ). In Guatemala, food prices and poverty have been correlated with lower micronutrient intakes (Iannotti et al. 2012 66 ). In the developed world, poverty is more typically associated with calorically-dense but nutrient-poor diets, obesity, overweight, and other related diseases (Darmon and Drewnowski 2015 67 ). Rural areas are especially affected by climate change (Dasgupta et al. 2014 68 ), through impacts on agriculture-related livelihoods and rural income (Mendelsohn et al. 2007 69 ) and through impacts on employment. Jessoe et al. (2018) 70 using a 28-year panel on individual employment in rural Mexico, found that years with a high occurrence of heat lead to a reduction in local employment by up to 1.4% with a medium emissions scenario, particularly for wage work and non-farm labour, with impacts on food access. Without employment opportunities in areas where extreme poverty is prevalent, people may be forced to migrate, exacerbating potential for ensuing conflicts (FAO 2018a 71 ). Finally, climate change can affect human health in other ways that interact with food utilisation. In many parts of the world where agriculture relies still on manual labour, projections are that heat stress will reduce the hours people can work, and increase their risk (Dunne et al. 2013 72 ). For example, Takakura et al. (2017) 73 estimates that under RCP8.5, the global economic loss from people working shorter hours to mitigate heat loss may be 2.4–4% of GDP. Furthermore, as discussed by Watts et al. (2018) 74 ; people’s nutritional status interacts with other stressors and affects their susceptibility to ill health (the ‘utilisation pillar’ of food security): so food-insecure people are more likely to be adversely affected by extreme heat, for example. In the case of food price hikes, those more vulnerable are more affected (Uraguchi 2010 75 ), especially in urban areas (Ruel et al. 2010 76 ), where livelihood impacts are particularly severe for the individuals and groups that have scarce resources or are socially isolated (Revi et al. 2014 77 ; Gasper et al. 2011 78 ) (high confidence). These people often lack power and access to resources, adequate urban services and functioning infrastructure. As climate events become more frequent and intense, this can increase the scale and depth of urban poverty (Rosenzweig et al. 2018b 79 ). Urban floods and droughts may result in water contamination increasing the incidence of diarrhoeal illness in poor children (Bartlett 2008 80 ). In the near destruction of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina, about 40,000 jobs were lost (Rosemberg 2010 81 https://www.ipcc.ch/srccl/chapter/chapter-5/

Picks an article from a wind and solar company and thinks they wouldn't be biased with their info on how great they are. Try again, Spun. You're failing miserably. As consumers, we pay for electricity twice: once through our monthly electricity bill and a second time through taxes that finance massive subsidies for inefficient wind and other energy producers. Most cost estimates for wind power disregard the heavy burden of these subsidies on US taxpayers. But if Americans realized the full cost of generating energy from wind power, they would be less willing to foot the bill – because it’s more than most people think. Over the past 35 years, wind energy – which supplies just 2% of US electricity – has received US$30 billion in federal subsidies and grants. These subsidies shield people from the uncomfortable truth of just how much wind power actually costs and transfer money from average taxpayers to wealthy wind farm owners, many of which are units of foreign companies. Proponents tend to claim it costs as little as $59 to generate a megawatt-hour of electricity from wind. In reality, the true price tag is more than two and a half times that. This represents a waste of resources that could be better spent by taxpayers themselves. Even the supposed environmental gains of relying more on wind power are dubious because of its unreliability – it doesn’t always blow – meaning a stable backup power source must always be online to take over during periods of calm. But at the same time, the subsidies make the US energy infrastructure more tenuous because the artificially cheap electricity prices push more reliable producers – including those needed as backup – out of the market. As we rely more on wind for our power and its inherent unreliability, the risk of blackouts grows. If that happens, the costs will really soar. Many government agencies are in the wind business these days. GAO Where the subsidies go Many people may be familiar with Warren Buffet’s claim that federal policies are the only reason to build wind farms in the US, but few realize how many of the companies that benefit most are foreign. The Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University found that, as of 2010, 84% of total clean-energy grants awarded by the federal government went to foreign-owned wind companies. More generally, the beneficiaries of federal renewable energy policies tend to be large companies, not individual taxpayers or small businesses. The top five recipients of federal grants and tax credits since 2000 are: Iberdrola, NextEra Energy, NRG Energy, Southern Company and Summit Power, all of which have received more than $1 billion in federal benefits. Iberdrola Renewables alone, a unit of a Spanish utility, has collected $2.2 billion in federal grants and allocated tax credits over the past 15 years. That’s equivalent to about 6.7% of the parent company’s 2014 revenue of $33 billion (in current US dollars). President Obama’s proposed 2016 budget would permanently extend the biggest federal subsidy for wind power, the Production Tax Credit (PTC), ensuring that large foreign companies continue to reap most of the taxpayer-funded benefits for wind. The PTC is a federal subsidy that pays wind farm owners $23 per megawatt-hour through the first ten years of a turbine’s operation. The credit expired at the end of 2013, but Congress extended it so that all projects under construction by the end of 2014 are eligible. In all, Congress has enacted 82 policies, overseen by nine different agencies, to support wind power. I explained in December why Congress shouldn’t revive the PTC, which expired at the end of 2014. In this article, I’m adding up the true cost of wind power in the US, including the impact of the PTC and other subsidies and mandates. It’s part of a study I’m doing of other energy sources including solar, natural gas, and coal to determine how much each one actually cost us when all factors are considered. As Warren Buffett has said, there wouldn’t be a wind industry without the PTC. UCS, DOE, AWEA Tallying the true costs of wind Depending on which factors are included, estimates for the cost of wind power vary wildly. On the low end, the financial advisory firm Lazard claims wind costs $59 per megawatt-hour. On the high side, Michael Giberson at the Center for Energy Commerce at Texas Tech University suggests the it’s closer to $149. Our analysis in an upcoming report explores this wide gap in cost estimates, finding that most studies underestimate the genuine cost of wind because they overlook key factors. All estimates for wind power include the cost of purchasing capital and paying for operations and maintenance (O&M) of wind turbines. For the studies we examined, capital costs ranged from $48 to $88 per megawatt-hour, while O&M costs ranged from $9.8 to $21 per megawatt-hour. Many estimates, however, don’t include costs related to the inherent unreliability of wind power and government subsidies and mandates. Since we can’t ensure the wind always blows, or how strongly, coal and natural gas plants must be kept on as backup to compensate when it’s calm. This is known as baseload cycling, and its cost ranges from $2 to $23 per megawatt-hour. This also reduces the environmental friendliness of wind power. Because a coal-fired or natural gas power plant must be kept online in case there’s no wind, two plants are running to do the job of one. These plants create carbon emissions, reducing the environmental benefits of wind. The amount by which emissions reductions are offset by baseload cycling ranges from 20% to 50%, according to a modeling study by two professors at Carnegie Mellon University. While the backup plants are necessary to ensure the grid’s reliability, their ability to operate is threatened by wind subsidies. The federal dollars encourage wind farm owners to produce power even when prices are low, flooding the market with cheap electricity. That pushes prices down even further and makes it harder for more reliable producers, such as nuclear plants, that don’t get hefty subsidies to stay in business. For example, the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant in Wisconsin and the Yankee Nuclear Plant in Vermont both switched off their reactors in 2013. Dominion Energy, which owned both plants, blamed the artificially low prices caused by the PTC as one of the reasons for the shutdown. As more reliable sources drop off and wind power takes their place, consumers are left with an electrical infrastructure that is less reliable and less capable of meeting demand. Lost in transmission Another factor often overlooked is the extra cost of transmission. Many of America’s wind-rich areas are remote and the turbines are often planted in open fields, far from major cities. That means new transmission lines must be built to carry electricity to consumers. The cost of building new transmission lines ranges from $15 to $27 per megawatt-hour. In 2013, Texas completed its Competitive Renewable Energy Zone project, adding over 3,600 miles of transmission lines to remote wind farms, costing state taxpayers $7 billion. Although transmission infrastructure may be considered a fixed cost that will reduce future transmission costs for wind power, these costs will likely remain important. Today’s wind farms are built in areas with prime wind resources. If we continue to subsidize wind power, producers will eventually expand to sub-prime locations that may be even further from population centers. This would feed demand for additional transmission projects to transport electricity from remote wind farms to cities. The final bill comes to… Finally, federal subsidies and state mandates also add significantly to the cost, even as many estimates claim these incentives actually reduce the cost of wind energy. In fact, they add to it as American taxpayers are forced to foot the bill. According to Giberson, federal and state policies add an average of $23 per megawatt-hour to the cost of wind power. That includes the impact of state mandates, which end up increasing the cost of electricity on consumer power bills. California is one of the most aggressive in pushing so-called Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS), requiring the state to consume 33% of its electricity from renewables by 2020. Overall electricity prices in states with RPS are 38% higher than those without, according to the Institute for Energy Research, a non-profit research group that promotes free markets. The best estimate available for the total cost of wind power is $149 per megawatt-hour, taken from Giberson’s 2013 report. It is difficult to quantify some factors of the cost of wind power, such as the cost of state policies. Giberson’s estimate, however, includes the most relevant factors in attempting to measure the true cost of producing electricity from wind power. In future reports, Strata will explore the true cost of producing electricity from solar, coal, and natural gas. Until those reports are completed, it is difficult to accurately compare the true cost of wind to other technologies, as true cost studies have not yet been completed. Blowing in the wind The high costs of federal subsidies and state mandates for wind power have not paid off for the American public. According to the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, wind energy receives a higher percentage of federal subsidies than any other type of energy while generating a very small percentage of the nation’s electricity. In 2010 the wind energy sector received 42% of total federal subsidies while producing only 2% of the nation’s total electricity. By comparison, coal receives 10% of all subsidies and generates 45% and nuclear is about even at about 20%. Wind gobbles up the largest share of subsidies yet produces little power. EIA But policymakers at the federal and state level, unfortunately, have decided that the American people will have renewable energy, no matter how high the costs. As a result, taxpayers will be stuck paying the cost of subsidies to wealthy wind producers. Meanwhile, electricity consumers will be forced to purchase the more expensive power that results from state-level mandates for renewable energy production. Although such policies may be well intended, the real results will be limited freedom, reduced prosperity and an increasingly unreliable power supply. Megan Hansen, a Strata policy analyst, co-authored this article. This article is published in collaboration with The Conversation. Publication does not imply endorsement of views by the World Economic Forum. To keep up with the Agenda subscribe to our weekly newsletter. Author: Randy Simmons is a Professor of Political Economy at Utah State University.

Spin is invested large and will defend them even if he looks like a fool doing so.

I'm curious why Bochia didn't answer my question?

A bunch of liberal brainwashed snowflakes who got so easily offended by some of his tweets. No wonder the brainwashing is continuing. The Dems have a lot under their thumb and they want more.

It still boggles my mind that people couldn't see what was coming, what was going to happen under a Biden/Democratic presidency. I had an advantage up here with already having Trudeau at the helm, so maybe that's not fair, but good god, did people just blindly follow and trust the likes of CNN and the MSNBC and nothing else?

Who in the fuck in their right mind would even consider getting a photo with her, or any Democrat, and want to pay for it? Hope you can get a refund, MC?

I'm sure you've noticed yourself, but our self proclaimed mental health expert is conflicted, and has been for sometime now.

And then there is this hypocrite. Where do these f@#$ing idiots come from? https://torontosun.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-sebastian-vettel-needs-to-quit-racing-right-now I have seen a lot of hypocrisy over the years, but this one takes the cake. A race car driver sponsored by Aston Martin, with financing from Saudi Aramco, complaining about the oil sands.

So, what were your pre-retirement plans? You know, the ones you made before you actually retired? Was your plan just not to work any longer and be fine with that? Have any hobbies such as golf, cars, trucks, atv's, bikes, shooting, bowling, anything? Tell me, who is forcing you to come on here as much as you do and because of that, you are giving up on retirement already?