Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

propublica.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–36 of 36 posts

Re: Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

#31

Post by gruez »

jjulius wrote: post #29
gruez wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I’ve come to the conclusion the only way to make progress on carbon is to ban the sale of new devices that use fossil fuel when an alternative technology exists. Maybe if you're a dictator. In the real world you'll face tons of political opposition https://www.euractiv.com/section/transport/news/combustion-e... https://www.politico.eu/article/heat-pumps-exploded-germany-...

That's kinda besides the point. The point is that without some kind of ban (viable or not, political opposition or not, made by a dictator or made by public voting, yadda yadda), you're not likely to make progress on reducing carbon emissions.

>without some kind of ban (viable or not, political opposition or not, made by a dictator or made by public voting, yadda yadda), you're not likely to make progress on reducing carbon emissions.

What's wrong with something like a carbon tax, which lets the market decide what the most cost effective way of cutting carbon emissions is?

Re: Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

#32

Post by hinkley »

doctorpangloss wrote: post #30
hinkley wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies grow in volume all the time. It’s a common way to vilify companies by ignoring their mix of good and bad and just focus on them doing the same volume of bad, despite doing more volume overall. I already suspected from the headline that’s exactly what they were doing, and they didn’t exceed my low expectations.

I don't know. Something something, "why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?" This is my feedback to you. All you have to do is say a number that should go into that spot that would be the smallest one that would convince you that the thrust of what they are saying is true. If you're saying there is no number, then I was mistaken for being charit…

You know this article is casting aspersions right? How hypocritical do you have to be?

I’d want to know what their goal was, what their velocity is, and what evidence we have that they intend to sandbag forever instead of just being 18 months behind schedule. This is generally how we’ve berated other fossil fuel giants in the past. So they were aiming for 5% and got 1% with a whole plant nearly done but not running. That could still go either way and there’s 18 months of subsequent data out there somewhere that would tell us which. Without that data there’s no scoop, no story. It’ll be news in January when their reports come out.

Re: Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

#33

Post by aguaviva »

autoexec wrote: post #20
cynicalsecurity wrote: post #12

Humanity is on the brick of the third world war and some still care of green energy?

I wouldn't take Putin so seriously. He's like a little yapping dog. All bark and no bite. He knows the US and EU could wipe Russia out in an instant. He isn't even capable of taking Ukraine. He has no chance at the rest of the world. His own people don't want or care about his pathetic war effort. If you're in the US, climate change is a much larger threat to your future than WW III the threat of which Russia has bee…

"All bark and no bite" is what many said prior to the 2022 full-scale invasion.

Of course he's probably mostly bluffing but this isn't just any eventuality we're talking about here. The threat is very real and must be taken seriously.

Re: Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

#35

Post by lightlyused »

hinkley wrote: post #25
lightlyused wrote: post #8

Just do what Ohio did and declare natural gas green. Problem solved. /s

Ohio seems like they won’t be happy until their rivers are on fire again.

True. They have a commission to approve fracking under State parks. It really is just a rubber stamp.

Re: Natural Gas Company Said It Was Going Green but Still Sells as Much Fossil Fuel

#36

Post by M95D »

gruez wrote: post #31
jjulius wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's kinda besides the point. The point is that without some kind of ban (viable or not, political opposition or not, made by a dictator or made by public voting, yadda yadda), you're not likely to make progress on reducing carbon emissions.

>without some kind of ban (viable or not, political opposition or not, made by a dictator or made by public voting, yadda yadda), you're not likely to make progress on reducing carbon emissions. What's wrong with something like a carbon tax, which lets the market decide what the most cost effective way of cutting carbon emissions is?

Loopholes.
Post reply on HN