Donald Trump
Comments
-
US already produces and exports more oil & gas than it imports.
That it still imports a lot of oil & gas is because its refineries have not all caught up with this development and are not set up to take on oil & gas from US fr@cking, as opposed to oil & gas from the saudis, though that is changing.
https://energy.gov/maps/us-crude-oil-pr ... et-imports0 -
No it isn't, keep up, Shale oil exploration and production has been underway for years. His ridiculous policy of re-opening uneconomic and polluting coal mines is to pander to the mid west redneck voters in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Alabama, Kentucky etcbenws1 wrote:Mr Goo wrote:benws1 wrote:TheBigBean wrote:It's much better to build a solar park and than grow biofuel, but what does that have to do with Trump?
To get this back on topic ...
Looks like Trump is going to make changes to America's climate policies. He wants to further utilise shale oil and gas and revive their coal industry too.
I just wonder whether this is to reduce reliance on middle eastern and south american resources. Fairplay if it is.
Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0 -
Spot on, at least Rick does his researchRick Chasey wrote:US already produces and exports more oil & gas than it imports.
That it still imports a lot of oil & gas is because its refineries have not all caught up with this development and are not set up to take on oil & gas from US fr@cking, as opposed to oil & gas from the saudis, though that is changing.
https://energy.gov/maps/us-crude-oil-pr ... et-importsAll lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0 -
bianchimoon wrote:
No it isn't, keep up, Shale oil exploration and production has been underway for years. His ridiculous policy of re-opening uneconomic and polluting coal mines is to pander to the mid west redneck voters in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Alabama, Kentucky etcbenws1 wrote:Mr Goo wrote:benws1 wrote:TheBigBean wrote:It's much better to build a solar park and than grow biofuel, but what does that have to do with Trump?
To get this back on topic ...
Looks like Trump is going to make changes to America's climate policies. He wants to further utilise shale oil and gas and revive their coal industry too.
I just wonder whether this is to reduce reliance on middle eastern and south american resources. Fairplay if it is.
Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.
Source?0 -
Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?benws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:
No it isn't, keep up, Shale oil exploration and production has been underway for years. His ridiculous policy of re-opening uneconomic and polluting coal mines is to pander to the mid west redneck voters in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Alabama, Kentucky etcbenws1 wrote:Mr Goo wrote:benws1 wrote:TheBigBean wrote:It's much better to build a solar park and than grow biofuel, but what does that have to do with Trump?
To get this back on topic ...
Looks like Trump is going to make changes to America's climate policies. He wants to further utilise shale oil and gas and revive their coal industry too.
I just wonder whether this is to reduce reliance on middle eastern and south american resources. Fairplay if it is.
Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.
Source?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computerAll lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0 -
bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Are you frightened to provide a source that backs up what you state? Seems like it.
Give me a link that shows he is solely pandering to voters in certain areas. By the way, I wouldn't trust everything shown on CNN and the BBC. Organisations like that have form for hiding what they don't want you to see.
0 -
One of the pipelines that has now been approved is to bring oil in from Canada. I can't remember the name exactly but something like the Canadian Oil Sands in Alberta. This involves felling huge swathes of forest and digging up sand to try and extract the oil from it. There are huge lakes of water used as part of the separation process as the oil floats up out of the sand. This heavily contaminated water is having a devastating effect on any birds that land on it as you can imagine. I think I read that it takes 250 tonnes of sand to get a barrel of oil. so it's hardly making America self sufficient unless he plans on invading Canada, environmentally it's disastrous. But the oil companies want it.benws1 wrote:Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.
Try reading up on some things, you might learn something.0 -
Frustration at trying to explain simple things to someone that thinks the whole thing is funny and can't be bothered to learn things for himself I suspect. I can understand that. Are you going to start claiming that CNN and the BBC are fake news? :roll:benws1 wrote:Blimey. You are a stressed little man.0 -
benws1 wrote:HaydenM wrote:benws1 wrote:HaydenM wrote:
Those things are the way they are because of the inevitable hole in government thinking and the way subsidies, incentives and taxes are applied. I'd agree with all of them apart from your wind power point though.
Wail link, but I can't find the page I read last year on this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -rush.html
http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A1434319.pdf
All windfarms in the UK are built with a planned generation timescale and a habitat management plan which covers decommissioning. They don't really destroy habitats or animal colonies as you suggest.
This reports states the habitat management isn't up to spec:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... tudy-finds
It says that bat strikes are under reported, it also says it can't be sure whether the bats have changed their behaviour since construction or that they weren't surveyed extensively enough prior to. It doesn't say anything that would weigh highly against the production of green energy as a replacement for fossil fuels. Even if it was suggesting we were wiping out all bats from the UK (it's not) it still wouldn't really be a toss up between it and say biofuels when you look at the damage they cause.
I'm not a massive advocate of windfarms but when compared against most other forms of energy production their impacts on the environment aren't so bad.benws1 wrote:Fenix wrote:benws1 wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:benws1 wrote:KingstonGraham wrote:Wouldn't it be easier to not mess up this one?
It's not about messing this one up. As a species, we will never survive if we are in one place. Look at the history of this planet. Extinction events happen.
Ah well.
We aren't a brilliant species, but I don't think we are doing the amount of damage we are told we are doing. We haven't been around long enough to say for sure that we are causing things like man made global warming. The Earth has been here a long time and has changed without any meddling by us.
Aah well if Ben reckons we aren't causing it - who needs the experts ? It's not like it's anything important or anything is it ? Lets just 'reckon' everything. What could possibly go wrong ?
It's my opinion, nothing more.
The experts haven't been around longer than anyone else. In terms of proper temperature recordings, they only began in England in 1659.
We can't predict the weather accurately much beyond a couple of days. Stating something based on models (which can have their flaws) covering thousands and thousands of years is dangerous.
One thing always puzzles me. Trees are supposed to be important to the earth. Yet, we seem to be felling them like mad to make way for biofuels. Yes, this article is old, but it emphasises my point:
<span class="skimlinks-unlinked">https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2007/aug/17/biofuelsmenacerainforests</span>
The experts have done much more extensive research into this than anyone else, they are far more qualified than any of us to make this assessment and there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that we are the cause of climate change. Whether my mate down the pub thinks it's a load of rubbish is irrelevant.
The accuracy with which we can predict the weather using models is also really quite irrelevant to whether we can use models for long term climate change. It's not unreasonable to use what we already know to try to predict what might happen in the future.0 -
^ this, i think some forum members have been using that sand for reasons other than oil productionVeronese68 wrote:
One of the pipelines that has now been approved is to bring oil in from Canada. I can't remember the name exactly but something like the Canadian Oil Sands in Alberta. This involves felling huge swathes of forest and digging up sand to try and extract the oil from it. There are huge lakes of water used as part of the separation process as the oil floats up out of the sand. This heavily contaminated water is having a devastating effect on any birds that land on it as you can imagine. I think I read that it takes 250 tonnes of sand to get a barrel of oil. so it's hardly making America self sufficient unless he plans on invading Canada, environmentally it's disastrous. But the oil companies want it.benws1 wrote:Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.
Try reading up on some things, you might learn something.
All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0 -
might be a little man, but with a bigger more open mind than some - ehbenws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Blimey. You are a stressed little man. Brexit and Trump getting you down? Poor little lamb. All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0 -
Compare that as an environmental impact to the oil sands.HaydenM wrote:It says that bat strikes are under reported, it also says it can't be sure whether the bats have changed their behaviour since construction or that they weren't surveyed extensively enough prior to. It doesn't say anything that would weigh highly against the production of green energy as a replacement for fossil fuels. Even if it was suggesting we were wiping out all bats from the UK (it's not) it still wouldn't really be a toss up between it and say biofuels when you look at the damage they cause.
I'm not a massive advocate of windfarms but when compared against most other forms of energy production their impacts on the environment aren't so bad.0 -
Veronese68 wrote:
Frustration at trying to explain simple things to someone that thinks the whole thing is funny and can't be bothered to learn things for himself I suspect. I can understand that. Are you going to start claiming that CNN and the BBC are fake news? :roll:benws1 wrote:Blimey. You are a stressed little man.
I've tried to find something to read about the pipeline you have mentioned. All I can find are articles stating Alberta is struggling with oil price crashes and many pipelines are being considered.
I haven't said I won't learn. I ask for sources so I can read and learn.
I think the real issue is that some people simply cannot handle an alternative viewpoint. When they then try to slap down someone who fights back, they get grumpy. It's fine. Doesn't bother me as it's the internet. 0 -
benws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Blimey. You are a stressed little man. Brexit and Trump getting you down? Poor little lamb.
Are you frightened to provide a source that backs up what you state? Seems like it.
Give me a link that shows he is solely pandering to voters in certain areas. By the way, I wouldn't trust everything shown on CNN and the BBC. Organisations like that have form for hiding what they don't want you to see.
Car workers is an area where he is pandering to workers in certain areas
Above you are arguing that man made global warming might not be caused by man. People will only have so much patience0 -
bianchimoon wrote:
might be a little man, but with a bigger more open mind than some - ehbenws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Blimey. You are a stressed little man. Brexit and Trump getting you down? Poor little lamb.
Not really. You come across as rather stressed when anyone states something you disagree with. If you really were open minded, you'd consider what others have to say before stating more silly Donald quips.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:benws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Blimey. You are a stressed little man. Brexit and Trump getting you down? Poor little lamb.
Are you frightened to provide a source that backs up what you state? Seems like it.
Give me a link that shows he is solely pandering to voters in certain areas. By the way, I wouldn't trust everything shown on CNN and the BBC. Organisations like that have form for hiding what they don't want you to see.
Car workers is an area where he is pandering to workers in certain areas
Above you are arguing that man made global warming might not be caused by man. People will only have so much patience
Read my follow up to your comment about global warming. I used the term 'man made' as that is the one of the labels for it.
Sorry, I can't help the level of patience that people have.0 -
You are saying something I disagree with, luckily the vast wealth of scientific concensus disagrees with you too.
"During 2013 and 2014, only 4 of 69,406 authors of peer-reviewed articles on global warming, 0.0058% or 1 in 17,352, rejected anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Thus, the consensus on AGW among publishing scientists is above 99.99%, verging on unanimity."
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10. ... 76166349580 -
Rick Chasey wrote:US already produces and exports more oil & gas than it imports.
That it still imports a lot of oil & gas is because its refineries have not all caught up with this development and are not set up to take on oil & gas from US fr@cking, as opposed to oil & gas from the saudis, though that is changing.
https://energy.gov/maps/us-crude-oil-pr ... et-imports
On this, if Trump wants energy autarky, he would do well to look further downstream.
US has very favourable policies for upstream development (tax breaks etc) already. The issue is further downstream.0 -
HaydenM wrote:
The experts have done much more extensive research into this than anyone else, they are far more qualified than any of us to make this assessment and there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that we are the cause of climate change. Whether my mate down the pub thinks it's a load of rubbish is irrelevant.
The accuracy with which we can predict the weather using models is also really quite irrelevant to whether we can use models for long term climate change. It's not unreasonable to use what we already know to try to predict what might happen in the future.
Fine. 0 -
With Trump, I'm reminded of Marilyn Manson's the beautiful people.The horrible people, the horrible people
It's as anatomic as the size of your steeple
Capitalism has made it this way,
Old-fashioned fascism will take it away0 -
Your first posts on this topic were that you think the whole situation is funny and you were laughing at people getting upset about Trump. Now you decide to set yourself up as an antagonist having previously had no feelings on the subject. Third rate trolling at best, but as you say not worth getting upset about it's only the internet. But with regards to protesting things that are wrong and can have a dramatic effect on the world, that is worth getting upset about. Don't say it won't effect you. If Trumps immigration feeds Muslim extremism, which I don't doubt it will, that's not just a bad thing for the US. Climate is a global thing, not localised. Don't start spouting sh!t about living on Mars please.benws1 wrote:I think the real issue is that some people simply cannot handle an alternative viewpoint. When they then try to slap down someone who fights back, they get grumpy. It's fine. Doesn't bother me as it's the internet.0 -
benws1 wrote:HaydenM wrote:
The experts have done much more extensive research into this than anyone else, they are far more qualified than any of us to make this assessment and there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that we are the cause of climate change. Whether my mate down the pub thinks it's a load of rubbish is irrelevant.
The accuracy with which we can predict the weather using models is also really quite irrelevant to whether we can use models for long term climate change. It's not unreasonable to use what we already know to try to predict what might happen in the future.
Fine.
Damnit! Now what am I going to do when I'm meant to be working Nothing wrong with a good internet debate for procrastination 0 -
Veronese68 wrote:
Your first posts on this topic were that you think the whole situation is funny and you were laughing at people getting upset about Trump. Now you decide to set yourself up as an antagonist having previously had no feelings on the subject. Third rate trolling at best, but as you say not worth getting upset about it's only the internet. But with regards to protesting things that are wrong and can have a dramatic effect on the world, that is worth getting upset about. Don't say it won't effect you. If Trumps immigration feeds Muslim extremism, which I don't doubt it will, that's not just a bad thing for the US. Climate is a global thing, not localised. Don't start spouting sh!t about living on Mars please.benws1 wrote:I think the real issue is that some people simply cannot handle an alternative viewpoint. When they then try to slap down someone who fights back, they get grumpy. It's fine. Doesn't bother me as it's the internet.
It's even more funny when I see responses like yours.
Yeah, Trump is really going to feed Muslim extremism. It's not like we have issues with that already, is it? The world was such a peaceful place until a few weeks ago. Any thoughts on Clinton potentially starting a war with Russia if she got in to power?
The climate thing can be discussed until the cows come home. I've given my opinion on it, that's all.
Mars would be a massive technical achievement. Considering the fact that we went to the Moon decades ago and haven't done anything since, we are still behind though. I'm glad we have companies like Space X pioneering new things. We need pioneers.
Where's that oil pipe link? 0 -
Mr Goo wrote:benws1 wrote:Mr Goo wrote:benws1 wrote:TheBigBean wrote:It's much better to build a solar park and than grow biofuel, but what does that have to do with Trump?
To get this back on topic ...
Looks like Trump is going to make changes to America's climate policies. He wants to further utilise shale oil and gas and revive their coal industry too.
I just wonder whether this is to reduce reliance on middle eastern and south american resources. Fairplay if it is.
Yes. I think that is exactly his reasoning behind it. He wants America to be self sufficient.
This will be interesting. It will het the OPEC members pi55ing out straight.
Cheaper fuel prices perhaps as their biggest client stops buying.
Can you straighten this out.
China is OPEC's biggest client0 -
benws1 wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:benws1 wrote:bianchimoon wrote:Source of what? read your own publications, watch CNN, BBC. Does the thought of keeping abreast of current affairs frighten you?
Sort of thing the Donald would say to his cabal because he he can't use a computer
Blimey. You are a stressed little man. Brexit and Trump getting you down? Poor little lamb.
Are you frightened to provide a source that backs up what you state? Seems like it.
Give me a link that shows he is solely pandering to voters in certain areas. By the way, I wouldn't trust everything shown on CNN and the BBC. Organisations like that have form for hiding what they don't want you to see.
Car workers is an area where he is pandering to workers in certain areas
Above you are arguing that man made global warming might not be caused by man. People will only have so much patience
Read my follow up to your comment about global warming. I used the term 'man made' as that is the one of the labels for it.
Sorry, I can't help the level of patience that people have.
Bear with me as this is important. There are three possibilities;
No climate change
Long term natural fluctuations in climate
Man made climate change
The third is not a random selection of words it means that we have climate change and it is caused by the actions of man. This also means that it can be allleviated by the actions of man.0 -
I've already wasted more than enough time on you.benws1 wrote:It's even more funny when I see responses like yours.0 -
benws1 wrote:Veronese68 wrote:
Your first posts on this topic were that you think the whole situation is funny and you were laughing at people getting upset about Trump. Now you decide to set yourself up as an antagonist having previously had no feelings on the subject. Third rate trolling at best, but as you say not worth getting upset about it's only the internet. But with regards to protesting things that are wrong and can have a dramatic effect on the world, that is worth getting upset about. Don't say it won't effect you. If Trumps immigration feeds Muslim extremism, which I don't doubt it will, that's not just a bad thing for the US. Climate is a global thing, not localised. Don't start spouting sh!t about living on Mars please.benws1 wrote:I think the real issue is that some people simply cannot handle an alternative viewpoint. When they then try to slap down someone who fights back, they get grumpy. It's fine. Doesn't bother me as it's the internet.
It's even more funny when I see responses like yours.
Yeah, Trump is really going to feed Muslim extremism. It's not like we have issues with that already, is it? The world was such a peaceful place until a few weeks ago. Any thoughts on Clinton potentially starting a war with Russia if she got in to power?
The climate thing can be discussed until the cows come home. I've given my opinion on it, that's all.
Mars would be a massive technical achievement. Considering the fact that we went to the Moon decades ago and haven't done anything since, we are still behind though. I'm glad we have companies like Space X pioneering new things. We need pioneers.
Where's that oil pipe link?
Here you go
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ene ... f0c5438ea60 -
Be interesting to see how Trumps drug statements of the last few minutes while potentially benefitting middle income americans, could raise prices in the rest of the world. I'm guessing not good news for third world countriesAll lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0
-
Pharma bosses sat round a table with trump, seemed to be cajoled into doing a joint press conference where they each in turn made statements backing up the presidents plan, he called on the pharmaceutical industry to boost their U.S. production and lower their prices, and vowed to speed up approval times for new medicines, but the overriding statement seemed to be the world has been getting away with buying US drugs cheap for yearsAll lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....0
-
Hopefully not at the expense of rigorous checks and balances.bianchimoon wrote:... and vowed to speed up approval times for new medicines ...0
