If the President actually gave a fying fluck about climate change, ver 927.
If the President wanted to reduce emissions today, he would explain to the people the necessity of doing the following:
Intentionally induce a global recession or depression.
2. That the President does not want to reduce emissions today is demonstrably true.
The President has told us, among other things, that by 2030, half of all new cars will be electric.
Leaving aside the energy sources of electric generation, 2030 and Now are different.
Much.
3. The President has also said that by 2050, we will get 50% of our electricity from solar panels.
Leaving aside the energy budget for building and installing those solar panels, 2050 is, again, significantly different than Now.
He has exactly zero interest in reducing emissions.
4. What he wants to do is create jobs. Specifically, he wants to create jobs a male human being with a high school diploma can do, and get paid well for doing it.
The reason he wants to do this is in the hopes those male human beings won't launch a street war.
Which, I admit...
5. But we can't create those jobs by increasing emissions today. I mean we can, but the results will be ugly, uglier than last year, and we'll see them next year and every year, worse and worse.
We watch each disaster as though it was unique unto itself, and as though it ended.
6. Exactly none of the destruction Ida did is in the news today.
All done, all over, what's new?
Louisiana is still massively broken. So are parts of New York and New Jersey.
So, for that matter, are parts of Houston from Harvey.
Paradise, CA, is still burned down.
7. Every year, increasing parts of the world are becoming unusable by developed societies.
In response, educated people say, "It's overpopulation."
Republicans say, "We'll fix that for you. Virus, or bullet?"
10,000 Haitians live under a bridge in Texas.
Half our new cars... 2030
8. The proposal to build (by reasonable reporting) 110 billion dollars worth of new and improved highways and bridges is nothing less than a crime against humanity.
I'm tired of trying to tell people how we make concrete and steel. I have come to the conclusion that nobody
9. in the entire Democratic Party except me has ever looked out the car window at the bulldozing and Earthmoving required to build just one stinking interchange in one stinking city.
The fact that virtually the entire party supports this - please, don't *anybody* try to tell me
10. that you want to see emissions fall in the next 20 years.
Just don't.
It's too disgusting.
Nobody who wants to see emissions fall in this decade, who has the foggiest notion of what emissions are or where they come from, could possibly support highway construction. Not any.
11. "Oh, but look, part of the concrete and steel is going to be installed to build electric car charging stations where the petroleum industry can sell you the electricity they generated with natural gas and coal!"
Oh. Fucking. Goodie.
In 20 or 30 years.
12. How's your sunsets look? Are they really deep red, dull, darkish?
Yeah, the West is on fire.
It used to be news, but if we talked too much about it people might get dubious about all these emissions reductions in 10 or 20 years.
And you know what's worse?
They're lying.
13. Those emissions reductions are never coming, and they know it.
14. It's a matter of scale.
This thing they're promising you can never be built.
Sure it works.
These work too. Rubber bands can power airplanes, and everybody knows it.
But an A-380 can takeoff at over a million pounds.
Real pounds.
Over a million.
Not on a rubber band.
Or solar
15. It is known and agreed that economic growth and emissions track so nearly parallel as to create a strong suspicion of interlocking cause and effect.
We can slow the entire economy.
16. A 55 mph speed limit would reduce emissions immediately, on the first day it was enforced.
"But people won't do that."
OK, I got that.
Everyone quit claiming to be concerned about the climate.
Because it is demonstrably false.
And the people we pay to keep us informed?
Rip.
17. All this crap is simple, easily proven, widely known.
We look at this question: which do we concern ourselves with, the climate or the economy?
And we say, The economy.
OK. I think we ought to have that conversation. Honestly. "Well, fuck the climate, we're going for jobs."
18. Every economist alive knows how to reduce energy throughput.
Energy is emissions.
Construction is emissions.
Paving is emissions.
Manufacturing is emissions.
Speed is energy.
Energy is emissions.
So, I understand what we're doing. I'm just pissed off at being lied to about it

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jeff McFadden

Jeff McFadden Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @homemadeguitars

20 Sep
A lot of evenings my thread is about something that really matters, at least to me, about climate and available actions, and I know that one will get the smallest number of likes and RTs of any of my work.
Sometimes I do hard science at about a 10th grade level, applying to 🌍🌎
2. Tonight, though, I'm just going to muse about energy.
I've been tweeting this image a lot lately. I find it endlessly fascinating. Image
3. As I often mention, what we call climate change - just that specific portion of the greater ecosystem collapse event - climate change is the accumulation of energy in the atmosphere and everywhere else.
Carbon catches the energy and stores it, which is why we think of carbon.
Read 22 tweets
20 Sep
I'm going to try this one more time.
This graphic.
All the lines are energy. All the boxes are sources or destinations.
If you increase any thing on the destination side, you have to increase something on the source side.
All the current destinations consume all the current src's
Manufacturing and installing renewable energy devices would be new activities or increased activities in the bottom to pink boxes, manufacturing and transportation.
The pink boxes would get larger. It would require more source energy to fill them.
Source energy is mostly emitting
For instance, burning one gallon of diesel fuel produces roughly 22.38 pounds of CO2.
I wonder if this process consumed any diesel fuel. 🤔
Read 7 tweets
19 Sep
About half of the people who thought up and wrote down the structure of this nation though slavery was morally justified. Ethical.
They had convinced themselves this was true.
Without slaves they would not be able to take, hold, and reduce for profit, great swaths of this, then,
2. wildly grand, undescribably productive, continent, whose owners did not have firearms.
This is called "Human nature" today, except the believers believe it is high energy machinery which makes this objective ethical.
Back then it was slaves.
Same purpose. Same *exact* purpose.
3. Without slaves, having the natural power of food grown on Earth for ourselves and animals, one family could take ownership of and control about 5 to 10 acres.
Anti-slavery Founder John Adams grew up on a prosperous 10 acre farm in New England.
Read 19 tweets
19 Sep
The global supply chain could not operate without plastic.
Before plastic containers were invented, the global supply chain as we know it did not exist.
I remember when plastic containers were invented.
The global supply chain is younger than I.
It now exists as a failure point.
The global supply chain could not exist without speed. You couldn't run this deal on sailing ships. You couldn't even run it on steamships. Diesels.
Only jet flight. Extremely high speed.
Imagine the killowatt-hours of petroleum in that fruit. The embedded energy.
100% waste.
I post this graphic often. It is extremely informative.
Alert people look at it and say MY GOD OVER ⅔ OF ALL THE ENERGY IS REJECTED! Less than ⅓ gives us desired results!
SOMEBODY FIX THAT!
(It's not fixable, it's physics.)
Read 5 tweets
17 Sep
I say the time we need to reduce our emissions is now.
I invite anyone to refute.
I say that it is inexcusable to plan a huge high emissions project to add to our already high emissions society.
I do not believe we have room to drastically increase our emissions now.
Refute.
The infrastructure project is ill-defined, but it is known that a significant portion of it is to build new highways.
Every increase in highway capacity has been immediately followed by an increase in traffic and traffic energy throughput.
Refute.
Read 6 tweets
17 Sep
G is way too busy with all the work she does for the Humane Society of Ray County, MO. She works *way* more than 40 hours in the average week at it. She's responsible for the books, the money, and the records of animals in and out, costs, income, disposition - some always die.
She also takes the pictures that go in the animals' record that we keep, and in the folder that goes to the adopter.
She makes up the folders. Assembles them from materials from various sources. Plastic folder, care information, animal's history to the extent we know it, chip #
So the gardens had gotten away from her. Grown up in annual grasses and forbs. I don't do much close-in work, my care area is the outer lands. She does the house yard. Flowers and food. It doesn't look like a row garden. It's pretty. (I can't find the picture.)
Read 12 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(