Forums

Trump nominates pro-fossil fueler/renewable energy critic to oversee wind and solar programs

Trump nominates pro-fossil fueler/renewable energy critic to oversee wind and solar programs

https://www.apnews.com/e7ba872b1a444e0c8b49291136ec28fb/Renewable-energy...

Yet another paid pro-fossil fueler to head up an energy department position. Are there no checks and balances within this administration? I would like to think that we all would like to breathe clean air, drink clean water, eat untainted food,...but fossil fuel money rules. They get people to sell their souls to the Devil, knowing full well what they are doing to future generations so that they can make a quick buck today. When money overrules morals and ethics,...shameful.

http://www.utilitydive.com/news/fossil-fuel-advocate-tapped-to-lead-does...

RedShift | May 3, 2017

Another 'breath of fresh air'. Next, a fox to guard the henhouse. To completely drive home the message: go against me, stupid liberals? In your face!

rxlawdude | May 3, 2017

Wow. Just wow.

mark.willing | May 3, 2017

This administration is talking out both sides of their mouth. One side is talking about reducing government regulations over businesses and reducing the business tax to enhance business growth. The other side is actively playing favoritism in their energy policies that effect the entire renewable and clean energy business market by doing everything they reasonably can to stifle growth.

For so many years, the public did not know any better, nor were they given a choice,...coal powered power plants, internal combustion vehicles, etc. Now, we know better, and now we are have been introduced to alternatives,...solar and wind power, EVs, etc. Even if we not mention the environmental impacts, the free market should be allowed to flourish without the state stepping in and actively trying to inhibit consumer choice.

This whole situation reminds me of the tobacco industry back in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. The tobacco industry spent billions on a campaign to fight the medical science that tobacco use presented a serious health risk to their consumers. Lobbyists, court cases, government inquiries, media campaigns,...the works. However, here is what makes the fossil fuel industry worse than the tobacco industry. Even back in the day, consumers had a personal choice of becoming a smoker or not. There were warning labels on the packs. Every time you went to the doctor, the doctor emphasized not smoking. The fossil fuel industry is now spending billions, if not trillions of dollars on getting their paid lobbyists into government positions to make public policy, finding and paying scientists to speak on behalf of the fossil fuel industry to deny the environmental effects to whomever is gullible enough to believe them,...actively inhibiting consumer choice and an entire renewable energy market.

You know what? F'k them. I don't care about how much money it costs me,...I'm getting off this train.

RedShift | May 3, 2017

Operating out of spite. Nice going douchebag. Hope you get impeached back to your mar a lago golden shower.

quinney | May 3, 2017

How long is Musk going to continue allowing himself to be used as a public relations fig leaf?

MitchP85D | May 3, 2017

I lost 4 and 8 years ago. I got over it. Found something Obama had to offer me. A 7500 dollar tax credit. I took it. It soothed the pain of my losses.

Time for y'all to do the same. You lost. Get over it!

RedShift | May 3, 2017

The planet is losing, that's nothing on your Faux anger over Obama ("the worst president ever").

No common sense in you conservatives, eh? All about petty little 'you LOST', we 'WON'.

KP in NPT | May 4, 2017

that's just his latest in ridiculous picks with contrary beliefs as head of departments.

Amazing anyone can find justification for it. It's all "We won and you lost and nanny nanny boo boo!"

mark.willing | May 4, 2017

You know it's funny. I must be an "odd ball",...I tend to be a conservative Republican in terms of my personal values. So when I express concerns over the environment and our administration "stacking the deck" with people paid by the fossil fuel industry, to make public policies against an entire renewable energy market and infrastructure, to go against the scientific community, to do everything they can to deceive the public into thinking everything is OK,...people think I'm a liberal. No,...that is just plain government and corporate corruption. That's not corporate competition and a "free market". When the fossil fuel industry has crossed the line to the point of knowingly causing physical harm to everyone and everything on the planet,...and then stacking the government with their people to make public policy and further inhibit the public's ability to choose,....hmmm. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that may be fraud.

Protecting the American people from corporations that cut corners and poison the people and environment, letting the American people make their own decisions about their energy policy, and allowing the American people freely choose an EV they wish to drive without making it so f'g difficult,...that should not be a partisan issue.

I know it's a difficult thing now-a-days to not look at things through a political lens. Basic issues have become politicized,...issues that really shouldn't be. To me it's about ethics, morals, and just being a good American citizen. It just seems the leaders in the fossil fuel industry are to the point they would kill to make a buck,...wait,...that's pretty much their corporate policy. I know there are good, honest, hard-working people in the fossil fuel industry just trying to provide for their family,...but at the highest levels,...pure evil.

MitchP85D | May 4, 2017

Hey mark.won't, if you truly were a conservative, then you would know that the only thing the oil industry is doing is providing a product that the public demands. You act as if the oil industry is pointing a gun at the heads of the general public and demanding the public to buy their refined product. People like you think that gasoline pumps are the oil industry's gun mussels that subdues the motoring public to the whims of the industry. People like you think that when someone flicks on a light switch or adjusts their thermostat, the fossil fuel industry is forcing that person to buy their source of energy.

You are no conservative or republican. If you were, then you would realize the auto industry produces the vehicles that require the volatile refined product the oil industry produces. You would know that it was Henry Ford who approached John D. Rockefeller to produce more of that volatile refined product to fuel the motor vehicles that Ford brought to the general public. Rockefeller didn't point a gun at Ford's head to produce the internal combustion engine so the evil Rockefeller could sell more gasoline.

The fact that Mr. mark.won't completely left out the auto industry from his rant demonstrates he didn't think this through very well. After all, it is the ICE vehicle that converts gasoline into the evil CO2 molecule that is gonna destroy the planet!

Liberals don't attack the auto industry because that would piss off the labor unions, which are their political allies. So, they turn their ire on the oil industry and use them as their whipping boy. Liberals blame the oil industry for the destruction of the planet when all the industry is doing is meeting the demands of the public. The public buys the ICE vehicles, and the public demands fuel for those ICE vehicles they buy!

Ya know, its funny. mark.won't tends to be a conservative republican? I ain't buying it!

J.T. | May 4, 2017

MitchP85S>>>>the only thing the oil industry is doing is providing a product that the public demands.

So are the drug cartels.

The public isn't choosing oil, until the present there really wasn't much of a choice. Now that there is, the oil industry doesn't like it. Good thing the beeper industry didn't have this much clout or smart phones would never have reached the public. :-)

What mark is accusing the administration of is making sure that the oil industry is not hampered by anything as American as competition.

finman100 | May 4, 2017

impeachment is a start. FYD2017.

mark.willing | May 4, 2017

It isn't public demand, if there aren't alternatives readily available. Fuel costs are a major complaint amongst consumers and all of those in the transportation and shipping industries,...they are not demanding more fossil fuels,...they'd rather have viable alternatives that are just very, very recently been offered. When the vast majority of folks go out to their local auto dealership, they end up with another vehicle with an internal combustion engine,...because that is all that is being offered. It's not a choice, it's not "free market", and it's not consumer demand. Oh sure, if you want a hybrid or an EV,...good luck with that. Outside of California,...dealerships don't even stock them on the lots,...and if you order one,...three months wait or you can't get one at all due to limited production runs. Then the dealerships and the automotive companies say, "Look, they don't sell, it's a money looser." Wrong. The consumer demand is there, but you can't sell what isn't available. Nearly everyone I have ever run across looks at the MPG on the window sticker and comparison shops, but if you are looking for anything other than a compact car, you're going to get hit at the gas pump. That's not a choice.

More to my point, though, is that now that there is a great growth industry in solar and wind, jobs available, and so on,...the fossil fuel industry has now put their people in key positions to make public policy against renewables, EVs,
the supporting infrastructure, and so forth. The majority of these positions are not elected by the American people,...if they were,...they wouldn't be there.

So this idea that "it's not like the fossil industry is pointing a gun at their head forcing them to use fossil fuels",...for most people, that's exactly what is happening. Unless you are one of the very, very few that have the means and live in an area where there is a supporting infrastructure,...you don't have a choice. Then having the Federal government further inhibiting your choices by having corrupted individuals put in key energy department positions,...that is not providing a unbiased playing field for the American people and the business community to allow the free market to operate.

carlgo2 | May 4, 2017

We don't have a gun at our head! People use gas because it is familiar, accessible, quick and does the job.

When the EV world can match this, the the situation will be reversed.

While the Trump guy might not help alternative energy, it remains to be see if he can actually get legislation passed that would somehow thwart it. Maybe this is best, forcing the industry on to greater efficiencies.

rxlawdude | May 4, 2017

@mark.willing, thanks for a reasoned post.

But you bring up an interesting fact. Today, when you vote for a candidate of one party or the other, you no longer are voting for a representative of your district or state. You instead are voting for a rigid PARTY's platform. And it's doom to any elected representative to not vote in lock step with the PARTY.

Thus, we now have party over country, and are far worse off for it.

finman100 | May 4, 2017

so far it ain't been much of a party with any of the crap the donald has pulled so far.

How do rational, reasoned people still support this dolt? no, really. what compels the stupid to follow the stupid? wouldn't you WANT to be better? smarter? it defies anything I've seen before.

J.T. | May 4, 2017

@finman >>>>>>How do rational, reasoned people still support this dolt?

He's the President of the United States.

RedShift | May 4, 2017

Sheesh, Obama was also the President of the USA. Look what they did to him!

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

Hey carlgo2, my ultra-liberal democrat sister is a perfect example of what you are referring to. In 2015, my sister and I were sharing the P85D. I was working overseas that year and she would drive it when I was gone. I got the car when I came back. My sister would travel weekly from Houston to a little town in East Texas called Nacogdoches. It is almost 200 miles one way. I told my sister to drive the P85D there because there is a supercharger in Huntsville, TX. She could charge there coming and going. I showed her where it was and how to plug it in. My sister, like all of the liberals here in the Forum HATES the oil companies. I told her this was a perfect opportunity to stick it to the oil companies.

But what did she do instead? She drove her ICE mini-van on her weekly commute. She spent 40-50 bucks on gasoline every week. I kept bugging her about that. "Why in the hell are you doing that for?" She said driving the Tesla was going to add to her commute time! In other words, it was an inconvenience to her to stop by the supercharger. I've always noticed this about liberals in general. They make demands for others to live the way the liberals want them to. But if liberals get inconvenienced by their own demands, they don't apply their own rules on themselves!

carlgo2 is quite right! "People use gas because it is familiar, accessible, quick and does the job."

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

You aren't seriously lumping all liberals in with your sister who opted for ICE over BEV for her commute?

The problem with conservatives (like you) is that you take one instance from your own worldview and project it onto everyone else. Gimme a break.

RedShift | May 5, 2017

@mitch

"I've always noticed this about liberals in general. They make demands for others to live the way the liberals want them to. But if liberals get inconvenienced by their own demands, they don't apply their own rules on themselves!"

I've always noticed this about you. You tend to make exaggerated generalizations. :-D

finman100 | May 5, 2017

so, stupid following stupid. got it.

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

Yes KP. My sister is a mere microcosm of you liberals! But, I may be overstating things a tad, but only that. Have you noticed there are not that many women Tesla owners? There certainly aren't that many in the Forum. Fast Girl and Philly Girl are the only ones I know of. I think women in general are a bit leery about driving a BEV out of town by themselves. They are afraid of getting stranded out in the boondocks if they run out of charge. They can't go to a gas station and get a can of electrons to fill up.

And this goes right back to carlgo2's point that gas is "...familiar, accessible, quick..." I think driving a BEV out of town is a bit scary for women. So, they opt for what carlgo2 pointed out. I showed my sister exactly what she had to do, mapped out her route, worked out the mileage, how to supercharge. She still would not go for it even though she bashes the oil industry every chance she gets!

People have choices. They tend to go with what they are familiar with and what they are most comfortable with. Conservatives like me want those choices to be available. Liberals want to LIMIT those choices!

The BEV market is growing. I say, let it grow on its own. Don't FORCE the public to buy it!

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

Omg hilarious.

I am a woman. My commute is 185 miles one way and I do it in a Tesla.

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

Should we also add sexist to your list of attributes?

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

Well, you are the third one I know of.

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

trixiew, shesmyne2, sbeggs, captain zap - just a few women here to name a few.

I would say it's less likely that a woman would take an interest in a car forum. I see plenty of women on the road in teslas.

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

lilbean, Melindav...I mean I could go on.

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

How many women Tesla owners are there? There are not that many that I know of. Not in the Forum anyway.

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

I don't have data and I doubt you do either.

I have named several on this forum and I am sure I am not naming them all.

I can say I see plenty of women driving teslas - on the road and at superchargers.

Last week in greenwich I saw 3 driving through town in a 4 block stretch. Good lord.

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

If we did a percentage breakdown of men/women ownership of Teslas, would it be 80/20, 70/30?

I just know in my family that my sister, wife, and stepdaughter are leery of driving the Tesla out of town.

KP in NPT | May 5, 2017

My brother is leery of Tesla because he drives high mileage every day managing properties and his ignorance regarding BEVs in general leads him to believe it will be cumbersome.

It has nothing to do with being a woman.

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

The percentage is probably much higher in California because the supercharging network is much denser, and range anxiety is much less.

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

If it absolutely has nothing to do about being a woman, then that bolsters my argument that liberals (like my sister) like to tell others how to live their lives, but pass on the opportunity to practice what they preach!

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

That might be it, KP. "I would say it's less likely that a woman would take an interest in a car forum."

MitchP85D | May 5, 2017

What is so sexist about stating a women would be more leery than men? After all, women are targets of sicko, predatory men! Correct? Does that make me sexist?