Fast and Furious: The Trumpening

“And now, I’m going to Florida.”

Wow, that was fast: just since this morning when the rumor started flying that the Russian Usurper was going to pull out of the Paris Climate Change Agreement…

Here’s the thing: Trump will not give in to pressure. Weak! Even from Ivanka (and it is highly doubtful to me that she is doing anything except lining her own pockets), so I expect him to double-down and do whatever is the most destructive. Also/too: bet me when we get to the bottom of the Russian corruption, we will find Putin and Gazprom (which is his own graft connection). Cutting fossil fuel emissions cuts Putin’s profit margin. That’s the real reason Trump wants this one.

This entry was posted in snark. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Fast and Furious: The Trumpening

  1. MDavis says:

    Exxon could branch out now and take the long view. They have three main aspects – upstream, downstream and chemicals. They work with chemicals, that is a business that should be diversifiable. See 3M and Dow for examples. Their ‘upstream’ business is in exploration, so they should have a head start on geothermal opportunities and wind and solar patterns for other energy opportunities. Their ‘downstream’ business is refining, which could be adapted to refine switch grass (Brazil is doing it) or adapted to distillation. That isn’t all alcohol, you know, they could make water potable with distillation techniques. Surely they have the technology to switch from refining and even Nestle should not be able to patent water!
    Or they could go the way of buggy whip makers world-wide when autos hit the scene.
    Push on, shareholders! Last quarter profits should not mean the last quarter the business was in business.

    Liked by 2 people

    • moeman says:

      This is an awesome comment.


    • Jim says:

      Ah, I see you’re in the same business as me (I work in climate change adaptation and renewable energy – and have for a long time but overseas). Yes, your points are exactly on point. In addition, the coal thing is insane: renewables don’t require mining and dealing with tailings and associated pollution, or cleaning and transport to power plant or disposal of ash (even if you do away with all air pollution regs). Costs are astronomical compared with renewables even accounting for coal’s high unit energy content. Biofuels are also a net energy loser and just a corn subsidy. We do need smart power tech networks to make the renewable storage work (and this happening) but distributed power networks are also already happening, especially in parts of the “developing world”. As a result, carbon emissions are flattening. Unfortunately, we will be getting a huge pulse of GHGs from the melting of the permafrost (methane) and other tropical forest conversion problems, amongst others. So, dire struggle.


      • Big Bad Bald Bastard says:

        Jim, what’s your take on using algae or duckweed as a base for biofuels, rather than using terrestrial vascular plants, especially those which are important food crops? My take is that photosynthetic carbon scrubbers could be incorporated into biofuel production facilities.


      • MDavis says:

        So, Jim, you work for who? Sounds like an interesting line of work, but it isn’t available around here – I work for Wal-Mart. Where do I go with that? ‘It’s about the only job in this burg and there are college degree holders stocking the shelves’, or ‘sheesh, even a lowly Wal-Mart employee can figure this shit out’.


  2. Feline Mama says:

    Pressure from ivanka??!! OH PLEEZE!! She is as “green” as my Black & White Kitteh!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She’s a trump for gawd’s sake. First & foremost!!!!!!!!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  3. What’s the difference between Ivanka and a mannequin?


  4. Big Bad Bald Bastard says:

    Cutting fossil fuel emissions cuts Putin’s profit margin. That’s the real reason Trump wants this one.

    Moscow grifting agreement trumps Paris climate agreement.


Comments are closed.