Climate change? EPA

Anyone else worried about how the EPA is being disbanded? USA pulling out of carbon-lowering international agreements, and how any of this could be followed by other countries and spiral into something really harmful for the global temperature?

This year 2016 saw 123 degree summer in India…

Where do we go when summertime gets 150 degrees? Honestly wondering how things might play out / SAFE / tech advancements (algae / nanotech converting carbon to 02?) can give future life a chance of survival at all?

:stuck_out_tongue: probably been reading too much about the election / first 100 days tbh,


I’m not sure you’re reading too much into it.

The U.S. is already the 2nd highest greenhouse gas emitter on the planet, and it achieves that by being over 2x as bad as China (per capita; for now). It’s worse than the EU though its population is less than 2/3rd of that. I’m not sure for how much of China’s emissions it’s indirectly responsible; I guess quite a bit, but that’s not something Trump can do for or against.

With all breaks soon removed, the U.S. alone will have the potential to screw things up really bad really fast for all of us. China? Let’s not even go there… We’re so f*cked.

1 Like

I’ve been hearing that EU and China have been going after CO2 reduction goals pretty seriously, and read that they might put pressure in Trump to not pollute our shared planet to death,

Anyone else think this can happen?

Other countries want to survive also

If you’re interested in renewable energies, economy and climate change, it’s worth looking into the renewable energies sources act Germany “agreed” (for lack of a better word) upon ten years or so ago. It had a huge impact, imo, still pushing cheap, ren. energies to the market.
One positive aspect in all this mess.
It achieved both, 25% market share (electricity) and well-payed jobs (for those who can achieve a higher educ.).

Theres stuff going wrong aswell, but still…

/edit actually it started over 20 years ago, and here is a huge wall of text about it: wikipedia

Estimates for 2012 suggest that almost half the renewable energy capacity in Germany is owned by citizens through energy cooperatives (Genossenschaft) and private installations.

Lets be really clear about this. Petrol energy is obsolete and dead, it will never recover from an economic efficiency stand point no matter what they do. It is built out and at scale, even if they give it away it theoretically can’t go any lower. Trying to base an economy on tech that in that in terms of economic efficiency tops out at 13% or a short blip of 20% for Japan and going up against other economies that use 80% economic efficiency green tech (solar) is strategic suicide. Doesn’t matter whether petrol is limited and there may have been better ways to kill petrol but its a dead sunk ship and nothing will raise it. Its laughable to hear about how destroying it is bad for the US economy, everything it does as a fuel is completely replaceable green tech. And every dollar spent on green tech and not on oil is the best defense the planet could have as a stabilizer and peace reinforcement. Don’t know what Russia does except switch to green. But in the US we need green economy plus a guaranteed annual income to deal with displacement from automation.

The business case for petrol is even worse, no matter what the US does it will never ever again be competitive (even if there is no peak oil) and no one has to buy the US stuff. Even worse its glutted and noncompetitive. Plus there is global hatred of petrol and the fortunes behind it, people know that its political poison and drives wars. Nothing will ever save it. One of the best reasons for divestment of petrol is its just the worst business decision one could ever make. Like thinking that investing in old flip phones will bring back obsolete tech. Obsolete-glutted-permanently too expensive-political poison- its dead, dead, dead. So if Trump wants to bury the US economy and bankrupt the US he can double down on Petrol. But he should take a clue from the Saudis who just sold all their oil on the open market all their reserves included and from the Rockefeller’s who divested Exxon saying it was the new Tobacco and would become public enemy number one and not try to destroy the country with dead tech. If he were really so pro oil why did the Bushes vote for her?


The problem with the “investing in oil is stupid” argument is that it doesn’t matter.

For oil-invested millionaires and and billionaires, going on with their present lifestyle (short term goals) matters infinitely more than what’s rational over 20 or 50 or 100 years.

And they can pull it off. They already have a fortune and, with that, influence, and it will only grow with the new president on their side. Of course, everything will be done in the name of helping the whole of America against a malicious wealthy minority and China and whatever comes up along the way as a potential enemy figure.

1 Like

I think what Warren is saying is that nobody will buy it, like coal for example will be so much more expensive than other cleaner ways, so even if they pay to extract it, nobody will buy it?

1 Like

Let’s hope Elon Musk’s solar roof and the likes of it will indeed get us there. If people can make their own energy, then it is possible. It seems decentralization can help in a lot of areas.


Why do you need him to do it? The technology is there already, and paying off. Combine Solar electricity with solar heat, and youre a large step closer to energy autonomy.
Or wind turbines, or heating/cooling from underground. All there, all working.

1 Like

Why did we need him to make an electric car that people actually buy and love?

You forgot to add “barely adopted” (everywhere and fast enough, that is.) The difference is that he did not only see the importance of renewable energy, but he also paid the effort to turn it into something that he can shove down everybody’s throat and then make them thank him for it. Even those who don’t care about pollution and climate change.

The story about renewable energy is very similar to privacy on the internet. Everybody knows it’s important, yet nobody cares enough to do something about it. This is where SAFE can make a difference, and this is why it needs to be something that people will use even if they don’t care about the philosophy behind it.

Both SAFE and Elon Musk’s ventures are characterized by their leader’s grit; when they have a vision that they believe in, failure is not an option.

1 Like

He’s just a billionaire who didnt even see it coming twenty years ago. Those we should thank for where we are now are ordinary people who have been fighting for decades to force governments to do the transition.

Maybe youre right regarding the states, but really it all started years and years ago, with the fight against nuclear power and coal. It’s Great that he’s pushing for it now, but he’s not a hero, nor a saviour. There’s no such thing, imo.

I hope he can help convince people in the states to start thinking differently. But only if people like you and me or whiteoutmashups fight for their right to a green future will we ever see one. Even China had seen it coming a decade or so ago. And Even they only really started thinking about it after the German government was forced/convinced they had to change something. It’s always just ordinary people, everywhere in the world, fighting for what they believe in. He might be one of them/us, just with a lot of money :slight_smile:

1 Like

Yea but that isn’t the point. He looked around to see how could he use his resources to make the most positive impact, and started out in that direction. I respect that. He’s slightly more visible than the rest of his kind, but I will respect anybody who lives like that regardless of the actual impact they can make.

100% agreed. All I’m arguing for is that to make stuff actually happen (and happen fast) sometimes it takes somebody with not just the right ideas but with the will and the means.


Its almost like we should be grateful to Trump and the Republicans for making everything so clear. We need a green economy and a basic income in the face of all this automation. Its very simple with all this clarification going on. Ryan is coming with an axe for Social Security and Medicare. Easy, extend both to age zero, increase the benefit and take away the work basis. Going to be great to watch these bubbas without any excuses to fall back on, no liberals to blame. They are bound to get in a fight with the public which they will lose. The retirement of the employer class is coming. Even the Elon’s of the world will have to deal with associates vice employees. But Musk is my favorite, I’d bet on him. Read what is available of his bio, its amazing.

Yeah, I agree. I think I’ve also been in a bad mood… It’s just sometimes it’s hard to see the good in all the bad. :rose:

@Warren I will


I never really thought this was a real idea, and never got behind it.

I think free markets with SAFE, and things like true decentralization / farming etc will be the closest the world ever gets (and needs to get) to a basic income sort of thing.

The corporations already have basic income; it’s called earning income from your assets. All we need to do is decentralize as much of the economy as we can, and then we can all have income creating assets (robots, PC’s, homes, self driving cars --kill Uber!! 3d printers --kill Walmart /Amazon /the need to go to the store!! etc - hope you see the picture I’m painting here). Just gotta murder the big, evil, inefficient corporations by decentralizing everything :slight_smile: A new, online, direct-democracy government through a SAFE App will truly expedite this

(making data freely downloadable on SAFE will destroy much of the Corp’s IP sucking)

I am right there with you but so were Tom Paine, Tom Jefferson and Keynes. Keynes forsaw the “euthanasia of the rentier class.” They just saw it was whose name was on the paper. But if we look hard enough it is our names. Its getting ridiculous. An electron is programmable and can store an infinite amount if info? Matter itself is programmable right down to sub atomic particles. The universe itself is a programmable Q computer? That is what is happening with Q computers. And people in 2003 like Tom Campbell already had decades of thinking about and working with this very idea!!! Work is over! Programmable universe is something out of the Twilight Zone and it snuck up on us. Deep mind neural net stuff we don’t program, it programs itself. We get useable results and answers out these systems but we don’t understand how. The universe and formerly inanimate matter is talking to us? Where is work in all this. Might as well retire to the ashram. Maybe the artist will have a job, maybe not. We don’t live in a classical world anymore.

I see the entire political side as neutral with regard to the climate change issue. There’s work to be done and that work depends on the cost. The cost depends on the developments undertaken by the innovators. The innovators depend on their passion and the finances they can scrounge up from investors and awareness groups. And those finances depend on active group and passionate members which are already working towards a Greener future. Policy is going to have nothing more than a tweaking Factor in the shape of the Curve, not so much in the start and end points.