It is more Tillerson(ExxonMobil) project than Trump as I think. As an example in Ukraine it big corrupt scheme, they buy overpriced 300% coal on money IMF fund or EU credits. 100% payment go on coal, other 200% divide between 2 corrupt sides of politicians.

"Also technology that DOES make burning fossil fuels "cleaner" than ever before."

The problem with that and coal is its total load of crock. Saying "clean coal" is as mindlessly stupid as saying I have a "healthy melanoma". Especially since Trump signed away many environmental protections on week one.

Massive investment is required to make a technology that is marginally less polluting but more much expensive than current coal technology ? a technology that is being undercut by renewable energy by ever increasing margins.

Clean coal is just a brain wash phrase, bit like Make America Great Again

2015, the party "GroenLinks' / "Green Left" supported it:

"In 2015, in Eemshaven, Groningen RWE put a new ultramodern power plant into operation, with a capacity of 1,560 megawatts. This new power plant, comprising of units A and B, will play an important role in the energy supply for the Netherlands in future years, because the provision of energy has to remain reliable and affordable. For that reason, ten years ago the Dutch government designated the Maasvlakte and the area around the Eemshaven plant as sites for new power plants. Partly because of the presence of a port for importing fuel and the availability of sufficient cooling water,ha RWE accepted the invitation from the Dutch government and has built an ultramodern coal-fired power plant in Eemshaven. The plant has been operational since the summer of 2015 and, since then, has been part of RWE Generation's production facilities in the Netherlands."
RWE AG - Eemshaven Power Plant

Just keep believing Trump will pollute this world in his 4 years. Maybe it gets 0.000000001 degrees warmer under Trump.

I am in favour of clean energy, i see that the big cities could be much better. Was great in Bangkok during a strike when all cars where forbidden in the center for weeks.
Left / right, all marketing.

that´s just one side of the truth because EVERYONE of the industry nation is paying into that (not really in a fund but in the own goal).
so what these country will not need for SURE is caol and oil.
but thy will need alterantive technologies. If USA (what does have the know how to be one of the leading nations in that) is ignoring that and tries to force other countries to buy coal and oil - it is WHO´s fault ?

as i said the only things these countries have to pay for is the technology.
the help for third world countries is in that case only in own interest because first of all it will safe the planet and second of all it gives them a better life. people with a better life will stay in their countries instead running away.

with enough energy these countries will also be able to do also international trades (ad yes that means producing cheaper for our prosperity) but they will always need the technology site and there will be new customers more and more.


if you mean with "for economy" that the billionairs will get richer you was right to vote for him. because these people will make the most money when your economy is broken. but the one who pays for it are people like you.
this is what trump stands for.

agree - but why you are voting for someone who wants to hold 50.000 jobs from yesterday and does not want to create MILLIONS of jobs fro tomorrow?

sure it is hard for an owner of oil pipelines to accept that the world is changing. if he would only be the owner of the pipeline it would not be a problem. but if the same owner is the president of the most powerful nation of the world and able to change laws in favor of his capital it really IS a problem.

the solar panels are not overprices - they are cheap when they are produces abroad but if you want them being produced by americans you have to pay the price.

for sure.

switzerland have voted out the nuclear energy with a majoriy of nearly 60%

BILLIONS will be invested - unfortunately not in USA because they offer coal and oil only.

germany produces in 2016 a total of 74,25 TERRAWATT only with windenergy - the first time more with wind as with nuclear (what will end in a few years anyway completely in germany).

india has opened in kamuthi the biggest solar plant in the world. 2,5 million solar panels are producing 648 Megawatt just from the sun.

the netherland (top position in the world for green energy) will spend in 2017 33% more in renewable energy.

even marokko´s goal is 42% renewable energy til 2020

and this list can go on and on...

and trump wants to save the jobs from 50.000 coalminers.

do you not see how he fools you ?

i am glad that you are completely normal in that way you think. others than other trump supporters what are in opposite of all what comes from the other side. i appreciate that from you.

unfortunately we can not build climate walls. this problem is a global problem and can only be resolved when the whole world is in that.

and if 90% of the whole world agrees in that topic and gives them just this in common it will open doors in between them.

i personally believe that trump will not be that long in the white house that he is able to close this doors to the world. but with every day he is there new contacts and trading deals will be done in between the others.
because fact is that US have NOTHING what other nations do not have. it would be hard but hardest for america if the world would have to replace america.
and they are already in that.
wait a few years and see what happens with exports from countries what are not willing to help against the climate change.
believe me - those countries will not export even a match anymore and than you will see how much america needs the world.

It is so simple, if coal is less profitable than solar/wind, it will take over.
Just a matter of time. Why worry, the market is Always right.

No need to fund other countries than, they will use solar/wind themselves.
And just say to china, if it isn't produced with solar/wind, we don't want it.
They will take care of their cleaner production, they are lending out money all over the world, so they have money.

agree !

but the point is that china is on the way there and US on the opposite way.
so i assume that we do not have to say it to china...but......

Hear, hear, hear!

if there was a free market... but if you subsidize coal to keep it alive there isn't

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Coal was once above ground. That's why it's called "Fossil Fuel".

There is no such thing as "clean energy" yet and maybe never. The only thing we can do is to cut down consumption.

And then selling those goods to the First World. :upsidedow

There is something wrong. It harms the profits of the 1% and we cant let that happen, that would help the 99%. :upsidedow

Customers of the West are often those who sell back to the West far more than they buy. And when they do buy, what is it that they bought, not products made by the likes of us. It's too often banking and goods assembled in the West.

Solar is part of the future, the US deserts would solve daytime power. the problem is solar doesn't have enough lobbyists and oil/coal do.

Agree about car emissions, but do Americans have to have such big cars?

Is it less expensive?

Take into account the unemployed, low wages, social and crime problems, etc. It's less expensive for the company to manufacture abroad. Is it less expensive for the government and if so by how much?

oh really? pray tell how a hydro electric dam pollutes? solar?

Paul, don't waste your time or energy.

It's a Jewish extortion racket, with the same "whitey is guilty" narrative as the Holocaust. The goal is fewer white babies, hence why none of this crap applies to China.

Not an insult Robbie, more of an observation.

I used to think your justification for supporting Trump was a genuine belief that he had some wizard economic wheeze up his sleeve which would turn the clock back 50 years to post WWII USA. I thought your Red Hat was ill-judged but sincere and that you had the intelligence to actually judge events as they unfold.

However after witnessing you make excuse after excuse for Trumps bumbling laughing stock of a presidency, I can see that you are really just another idiot who will argue black is white. Another angry white male who believes that "they are stealin our jobs", another Trump supporter whose world outlook is as ignorant and unsophisticated as his Emperor.

You might as well punctuate every sentence with the phrase "dumb libs".

:Oh crap

Hydro - flooding large areas, displacing towns, changing the river water flow in a way disruptive to wildlife, silt backup behind the dam, etc.

Solar - large amount of toxic materials used to produce the panels, huge land use per megawatt of power, impact on wildlife, disposal of the toxic panels after they loss too much efficiency to still be of use.

Every energy technology pollutes over its life cycle. Most studies show hydro and nuclear as the cleanest overall (smallest overall environmental impact).

I disagree.

We can reduce consumption like you said but its hard to change peoples habits. An easier and better way is to make appliances and cars more energy efficient, and make the ways we harvest energy more efficient too. All of this should be IN ADDITION to deriving energy from cleaner sources such as solar and wind.


For sure some 1%'s will say that, but of course the opposite is true. It would mean more jobs and more money for everyone, which means more money for spending, more money for taxes, and hopefully more general happiness for everyone.


I'm a greeney I promise, but Hydro electric means big changes to the land and water. Increased biomass in the water could mean increased methane. The manufacturing of solar panels pollutes too. Of course the damage these cause are small compared to the gains, but everything everywhere, pollutes.


All very true, though hopefully everything adapts. The benefits though really outweigh the costs, and most importantly, the energy you get from the damn is renewable.


True, but like Hydro, the benefits are huge and the costs relatively low. And also, Solar Panels last an average of 25 years before losing only 20% of their efficiency.

Gasoline and other fossil fuels do, but things like solar and wind do not.

Correct. And even though Nuclear scares alot of people, it is actually very clean with a very small overall impact, especially if the new modern power planets replace the old ones.

I wish more people thought like this.

signed!!!!

looool

you are the funniest idiot i have ever seen.

do you not have an insurance who pays you the clinic you need?

great not? if the "first" world is dumb enough to count on coal. meanwhile they get exactly what they are good for.

my applause is for the chinese and not for the dumbfuckers

btw. WHY first world ???

are you including yourself in that?

since 7,00 green energy

It's not just the Jews. It's the 1%.

So you agree with me.




More jobs in China maybe. That's before automation kicks in. Your thinking of a different time maybe the 70s?

yes hydro electric entails a big change to the land and water ONCE...flooding a region certainly has impact that ONE time...but for the next 10000 years it will give clean power...this is a very very strong argument...

You are obviously so much smarter than I am.
I must bow down to your superiority.

I sincerely apologize for having a different political viewpoint than you.
You and everyone that hates Trump are my intellectual superiors.
You, bladewire, crockett, rochard...and the list goes on. I feel like such a fool now for ever having the audacity to step out of line from your thought process.
Please forgive me.