Hurricane Seasons, Erosion, Rising Seas, Sinking Land Mass

[CajunVic]

you hit the trigger word . . . pay . . . they like the pay they get from the gubment at the get go to waste the gubment money . . . they get their money and get out before the need for the graveyards arise, before the habitat is destroyed . . . did someone post scam earlier, all of this clean energy is noting but a scam to get thier hands on gubment funding from the beginning . . .

[fpc4life99]

Yes 5 million gallons of crude oil in the ocean is perfectly okay. How about all these toxic batteries, solar panels and windmill graveyards? You know tainting our water system? Or what about all the birds they kill? The animal habitat they are destroying? On top of all of that it’s not even practical. At what cost should we all pay to make you feel better about yourself?

Efforts are underway to address these through recycling and responsible disposal. Companies like Tesla have made strides in battery recycling, aiming to reduce toxic waste and recover valuable materials (Tesla's Battery Recycling Initiative).

Studies show that solar panels and wind turbines can help mitigate climate change impacts over their lifetimes, despite initial environmental costs (Environmental Benefits of Renewable Energy).

Renewable energy technologies are becoming increasingly practical and cost-effective. Advances in technology and economies of scale are driving down costs, making renewable energy a competitive option (Cost Trends for Renewable Energy).

Companies across various industries are investing in recycling initiatives to manage the environmental impact of their products. For example, companies like First Solar have established comprehensive recycling programs for solar panels, aiming to recover up to 90% of materials for reuse (First Solar's Recycling Program).

I tried to attach the links but it doesn't look like it worked. You should be able to google the articles if you want to know more.

[CajunNation]

The claim that human activities contribute only 6% to greenhouse gases, with the remaining 94% coming from natural sources, is not supported by current scientific consensus. According to NASA and other reputable sources, human activities, such as burning fossil fuels and deforestation, significantly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, which have risen dramatically since the Industrial Revolution. These emissions are considered the primary driver of anthropogenic climate change.
..

red flags

[fpc4life99]

red flags

It's understandable to have concerns about terms like "consensus," "reputable," and "anthropogenic" in discussions about complex topics like climate change. These terms can be viewed as deniable because they represent scientific conclusions that may challenge preconceived beliefs or ideologies. Can you expand here on your thoughts?

[fpc4life99]

you hit the trigger word . . . pay . . . they like the pay they get from the gubment at the get go to waste the gubment money . . . they get their money and get out before the need for the graveyards arise, before the habitat is destroyed . . . did someone post scam earlier, all of this clean energy is noting but a scam to get thier hands on gubment funding from the beginning . . .

The estimated total subsidies provided to the oil and gas industry in the United States over the past 20 years vary widely depending on the source and methodology used for calculation. However, to provide a general figure based on various analyses and reports:

According to a report by Oil Change International, federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, which includes oil and gas, averaged approximately $20 billion per year from 2015 to 2019 in the US.

Another analysis by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) estimates that direct federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry have totaled around $15 billion annually in recent years.

Thus, over a 20-year period, these subsidies could range from $300 billion to $400 billion, considering fluctuations in annual subsidy amounts and adjusting for inflation and other factors over time.

Meanwhile the top 9 individuals of the top oil and gas companies make:

Darren Woods - CEO of ExxonMobil: $15 million to $20 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Michael Wirth - CEO of Chevron: $15 million to $20 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Ryan Lance - CEO of ConocoPhillips: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Bernard Looney - CEO of BP: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Ben van Beurden - CEO of Shell: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Vicki Hollub - CEO of Occidental Petroleum: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Lorenzo Simonelli - CEO of Baker Hughes: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Jeff Miller - CEO of Halliburton: $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

Anders Opedal - CEO of Equinor (successor to Eldar Sætre): $10 million to $15 million, including bonuses and other incentives.

[Turbine]

I like my electric car.

Can't use it to get away from a hurricane though.

[CajunVic]

The estimated total subsidies provided to the oil and gas industry in the United States over the past 20 years vary widely depending on the source and methodology used for calculation. However, to provide a general figure based on various analyses and reports:

According to a report by Oil Change International, federal subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, which includes oil and gas, averaged approximately $20 billion per year from 2015 to 2019 in the US.

Another analysis by the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) estimates that direct federal subsidies to the oil and gas industry have totaled around $15 billion annually in recent years.

Thus, over a 20-year period, these subsidies could range from $300 billion to $400 billion, considering fluctuations in annual subsidy amounts and adjusting for inflation and other factors over time.

I was not talking about subsidies to the energy source which makes the world go . . . I was talking about the "clean energy sources" which for the most part make only the entrepreneur involved grow . . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand...ture-proposal/

[fpc4life99]

To be clear I think maintaining a balanced approach in energy use is crucial. Oil and gas are integral to various industries beyond just energy production, including manufacturing, transportation, and petrochemicals for essential products like lubricants. Transitioning to renewable energy sources while optimizing efficiency and reducing environmental impacts in the oil and gas sector can help achieve a sustainable energy future. Striking this balance ensures that we meet current energy needs while responsibly planning for the future.

[CrazyCajun]

Efforts are underway to address these through recycling and responsible disposal. Companies like Tesla have made strides in battery recycling, aiming to reduce toxic waste and recover valuable materials (Tesla's Battery Recycling Initiative).

Studies show that solar panels and wind turbines can help mitigate climate change impacts over their lifetimes, despite initial environmental costs (Environmental Benefits of Renewable Energy).

Renewable energy technologies are becoming increasingly practical and cost-effective. Advances in technology and economies of scale are driving down costs, making renewable energy a competitive option (Cost Trends for Renewable Energy).

Companies across various industries are investing in recycling initiatives to manage the environmental impact of their products. For example, companies like First Solar have established comprehensive recycling programs for solar panels, aiming to recover up to 90% of materials for reuse (First Solar's Recycling Program).

I tried to attach the links but it doesn't look like it worked. You should be able to google the articles if you want to know more.

Recycling hasn’t worked anywhere else, it won’t work here, it’s not cost effective or energy efficient. It’s another feel good story.

[fpc4life99]

I was not talking about subsidies to the energy source which makes the world go . . . I was talking about the "clean energy sources" which for the most part make only the entrepreneur involved grow . . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamand...ture-proposal/

Whether it's through subsidies or investments, both can end up costing taxpayers. Consider these examples from the oil and gas industry that have had significant financial impacts on US taxpayers:

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill in 2010, where BP's Gulf of Mexico spill led to massive cleanup costs and compensation payouts.
The Petrobras Corruption Scandal in 2014, involving billions in bribes and inflated contracts at Brazil's state-owned oil company.
Venezuela's Oil Industry Decline due to mismanagement and political instability, impacting its production and global supply.
The Enron Collapse in 2001, which involved major energy trading operations and resulted in one of the largest bankruptcies in corporate history.
North Sea Oil Rig Disasters like Piper Alpha in 1988, which caused fatalities and environmental damage.
The Exxon Valdez Oil Spill in 1989, where an Exxon tanker spill in Alaska caused extensive ecological harm.
Chernobyl Nuclear Disaster in 1986, highlighting catastrophic industrial failures and long-term environmental impacts.
The Keystone XL Pipeline Cancellation in 2021, after facing regulatory and environmental challenges.
OPEC Price Wars destabilizing global oil markets periodically.
Shell's Arctic Drilling Halt in 2015 due to regulatory hurdles, costs, and environmental concerns.
These incidents show the complexities and costs involved in the oil and gas industry, impacting both finances and the environment. Understanding these examples helps us evaluate the broader discussion around government support for different energy sectors.