Exxon sold carbon capture and storage as a climate solution — but under new Trump tax credits, public funds will be directed toward more oil extraction with less regulation.
That’s quite humorous..you advise me to get off ‘right wing’ news, then you produce an unsupported piece from the well-known lefty rag..The Guardian.
I realise some of the people who get sucked in by crap articles such as the one you’ve referred me to don’t think it’s necessary that evidence by way of scientific experiments to support the narrative are vital to give the yarn any credibility.
Tell you what Geoffrey, from your stash of thousands of scientific studies, how about you produce just one scientific laboratory experiment carried out in the Santa Claus Village region. That experiment will naturally include all the components of Earth’s Climate System and the output (temperature gauge) will show that by adding certain amounts of carbon pollution from the Santa Claus Village region, high temperatures will occur in summer and vary depending on how much pollution is added.
If you can’t find one specifically for the Santa Claus Village region, any will suffice.
Exxon used its own scientists in the 1970s to study the effects of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, and what they predicted aligns with what we're seeing today.
So instead of producing a single scientific laboratory experiment containing all the elements of Earth’s Climate System as I requested, you think a signed warning letter, a file showing the US Navy’s security system is compromised and three clips from YouTube will do in its place.
Is this really the best you can come up with.
Incidentally, who read this signed letter?
The US Navy deserves to have all its fleet at the bottom of the sea - I mean they’ve had 8 years to update its security system to ward off attacks from increases in atmospheric Co2.
If you honestly believe opinions posted on YouTube are better than a single proven experiment in a laboratory then I fully understand how your political career is in the doldrums- yes I’ve been reading about your fall from grace in US politics. Still it’s probably a good time to be out of it. In time AI might replace the whole shebang.
Oh and before I conclude this reply, I see it’s mentioned in at least one of your links that CO2 is a pollutant.
I hope you have the intelligence to know that isn’t true.
Carbon dioxide is just the opposite of a pollutant. It is a plant food, a fertilizer so to speak, with a long way to go in the current buildup of atmospheric concentration.
Here in Minnesota, the so-called green technology plan is to capture carbon at an ethanol plant in SE MN and build a pipeline to the Dakotas to pump the captured carbon into oil/fracking fields there.
Of course, other sites will be connected via the carbon capture pipeline as well….
Just the carbon emitter from building and operating this proposed infrastructure will do huge amounts of environmental damage…
It is obvious that these folks are already all about putting the biosphere to death, isn’t it?
I've known CCS is a scam for a long time, this is salt in the wound. Thank you for the good information.
Not nearly as big a scam as the ‘climate change’ scam.
You are wildly misled, Ted. Get off the right wing news and pay attention. I could provide you hundreds, no thousands of articles and scientific studies that refute your lame, predictably unsupported words. Here is just one, hopefully at your reading level. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/aug/02/nordic-countries-hit-by-truly-unprecedented-heatwave
That’s quite humorous..you advise me to get off ‘right wing’ news, then you produce an unsupported piece from the well-known lefty rag..The Guardian.
I realise some of the people who get sucked in by crap articles such as the one you’ve referred me to don’t think it’s necessary that evidence by way of scientific experiments to support the narrative are vital to give the yarn any credibility.
Tell you what Geoffrey, from your stash of thousands of scientific studies, how about you produce just one scientific laboratory experiment carried out in the Santa Claus Village region. That experiment will naturally include all the components of Earth’s Climate System and the output (temperature gauge) will show that by adding certain amounts of carbon pollution from the Santa Claus Village region, high temperatures will occur in summer and vary depending on how much pollution is added.
If you can’t find one specifically for the Santa Claus Village region, any will suffice.
15,372 scientists signed a letter in 2017 warning of climate change.
https://www.bluethirtyseven.org/scientists-call-climate-change-impact-catastrophic/
The DOD (Navy) identified global warming as an existential security threat in 1990 in this 87-page document.
https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/weather/climatechange/globalclimatechange-navy.pdf
Exxon used its own scientists in the 1970s to study the effects of increasing CO2 in the atmosphere, and what they predicted aligns with what we're seeing today.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAAbcNl4Lb8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMe-BYUIPLU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8UOJqs5F9Q
So instead of producing a single scientific laboratory experiment containing all the elements of Earth’s Climate System as I requested, you think a signed warning letter, a file showing the US Navy’s security system is compromised and three clips from YouTube will do in its place.
Is this really the best you can come up with.
Incidentally, who read this signed letter?
The US Navy deserves to have all its fleet at the bottom of the sea - I mean they’ve had 8 years to update its security system to ward off attacks from increases in atmospheric Co2.
If you honestly believe opinions posted on YouTube are better than a single proven experiment in a laboratory then I fully understand how your political career is in the doldrums- yes I’ve been reading about your fall from grace in US politics. Still it’s probably a good time to be out of it. In time AI might replace the whole shebang.
Oh and before I conclude this reply, I see it’s mentioned in at least one of your links that CO2 is a pollutant.
I hope you have the intelligence to know that isn’t true.
Carbon dioxide is just the opposite of a pollutant. It is a plant food, a fertilizer so to speak, with a long way to go in the current buildup of atmospheric concentration.
Life depends on it. Without it, everything dies.
15,372 scientists signing a letter warning of the existential threat of climate change won't do for you.
A declassified document warning from the Navy warning of worldwide upheaval from climate change is insufficient evidence.
An in depth three-part documentary exposing that Big Oil knew they were overheating the planet in the 1970s can't crack your brainwashed skull.
Clearly, predictably, you didn't study the evidence I gave you at all.
And your last "point", well, the brainwashing it exhibits makes you a lost cause. Done with you Teddy.
Ahh, Loosiana, where the Petro-Ghouls have ruled supreme for…let’s see, time enough to turn the state into an industrial dumping ground.
Education? Nah.
Quality of life? 😂
Profit center for petro-ghouls? Fuck yes!
Here in Minnesota, the so-called green technology plan is to capture carbon at an ethanol plant in SE MN and build a pipeline to the Dakotas to pump the captured carbon into oil/fracking fields there.
Of course, other sites will be connected via the carbon capture pipeline as well….
Just the carbon emitter from building and operating this proposed infrastructure will do huge amounts of environmental damage…
It is obvious that these folks are already all about putting the biosphere to death, isn’t it?