Hotcold Take: America Needs Negative Zero, Not Net Zero

It’s always something with this doomsday cult, who also won’t give up their fossil fuels, modern lifestyles, and go carbon neutral

Forget “net zero” emissions target — U.S. must get to “net negative” ASAP, nonprofit argues

A new policy roadmap provides Congress and the White House with ways to support the growth of methods to pull carbon dioxide from the atmosphere using everything from existing forests to direct air capture machines.

Driving the news: Recent climate studies, such as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 1.5-degree report, have pointed to the clear need for society to pursue strategies for driving carbon emissions into negative territory by the latter half of the century.

Yes, but: Many of the technologies we are going to need to get to negative emissions— which can only happen after actual emissions are brought to near zero — don’t yet exist or don’t exist in cost effective ways at scale.

State of play: That’s where the nonprofit group Carbon180 comes in. The California and DC-based group aims to promote policy solutions to rapidly push forward a “transformation” in carbon removal.

Or, bear me out, they could mind their own f’ing business and concentrate on their own lives. Perhaps they can get this all done in California and D.C., which would serve as the experimental groups.

But, they’re happy to use your money and get government to tax you. Also

The man unloading is driving an older Civic LX. Why hasn’t he purchased a hybrid or EV?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

5 Responses to “Hotcold Take: America Needs Negative Zero, Not Net Zero”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Teach types: …won’t give up their fossil fuels, modern lifestyles, and go carbon neutral

    He pretends to know. It’s actually a logic fallacy pretending that unless someone gives up ALL fossil fuels and ALL modern conveniences they are HYPOCRITES and their argument is invalid. It’s an Alinskyesque tactic. If he drove a hybrid, Teach would ask, “Why not an EV?”, and if he drove an EV, “Why not a scooter?”, and if he rode a scooter, “Why not a bicycle?” and on and on?

    Obviously, the male “Karen” should have kept his mouth shut concerning the Corvette. It’s none of his business.

    But then Teach let’s fly at the guy for driving a Honda Civic, a very fuel efficient model, better than even some hybrids.

    • drowningpuppies says:

      All the arguments put forward by Rimjob, dipshit that he is, are invalid.

      Hypocritical too. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_scratch.gif
      But he tries so hard to be relevant.

      #BelieveTheLie
      Bwaha! Lolgf https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_cool.gif

    • Dana says:

      The distinguished Mr Dowd wrote:

      If he drove a hybrid, Teach would ask, “Why not an EV?”, and if he drove an EV, “Why not a scooter?”, and if he rode a scooter, “Why not a bicycle?” and on and on?

      This is called the strawman fallacy, as Mr Dowd puts words in our humble host’s mouth (keyboard?) and then tries to shoot them down with mockery. Could the noble Mr Dowd point to a comment made by our host, ever, in which he criticized a hybrid owner for not driving a plug-in electric?

      Yeah, I thought not.

  2. Dana says:

    Our esteemed host tweeted, “Or, hear me out, you could mind your own f’ing business.” Sadly, to the left, there is no longer any such thing as our own f’ing business. Everything we do, everything we say, even everything we might think, is now other people’s business, too.

  3. Kye says:

    “Everything we do, everything we say, even everything we might think, is now other people’s business, too.”

    Just like Nazi’s. Whoda thunk?

Bad Behavior has blocked 10133 access attempts in the last 7 days.