any californians here?

[ericlp]

I wonder what they think about Trump fighting back from the push of "clean air act" ??? Now the cry baby wants to open up prime BLM land for gas and oil exploration --- apparently he can't get the air dirty because of california emission laws.

Trump administration ends five-year oil and gas drilling moratorium in California

The Trump administration Friday announced it would make 725,000 acres of land in California’s central coast open to oil and gas lease sales, ending a five-year moratorium.The decision by the Bureau…

thehill.com

Trump raises stakes in fight with California by threatening to pull highway funds over state air quality plans | CNN Politics

The Environmental Protection Agency is threatening to withhold federal highway funds from California in the latest skirmish between the Trump administration and the Golden State.

www.cnn.com

"there are a lot of ways the federal government can make life difficult for a state."

Will be interesting to see what California government will do about this.

 

[K1052]

The Trump admin is going to, and has already, loose a lot of legal cases because their policy decisions are arbitrary at best and vindictive at worst with little real reason to back up the changes. Worse the policies are contradictory and there is no easy way to explain your way out of that in court.

CA is going to win most, if not all, its environmental lawsuits. Also the Trump presidency isn't likely to last longer than the...State of California. Industry better bunkering down for the blowback that's going to come once he's out of office.

 

[Greenman]

I wonder what they think about Trump fighting back from the push of "clean air act" ??? Now the cry baby wants to open up prime BLM land for gas and oil exploration --- apparently he can't get the air dirty because of california emission laws.

Trump administration ends five-year oil and gas drilling moratorium in California

The Trump administration Friday announced it would make 725,000 acres of land in California’s central coast open to oil and gas lease sales, ending a five-year moratorium.The decision by the Bureau…

thehill.com

Trump raises stakes in fight with California by threatening to pull highway funds over state air quality plans | CNN Politics

The Environmental Protection Agency is threatening to withhold federal highway funds from California in the latest skirmish between the Trump administration and the Golden State.

www.cnn.com

"there are a lot of ways the federal government can make life difficult for a state."

Will be interesting to see what California government will do about this.

The land in question was already slated for oil and gas exploration, that process was stopped because of fracking concerns not being addressed in the environmental impact reports. The reports have been completed and the process is moving forward. This all started well before Trump was elected.

 

[KeithP]

Been living in California since 1974…more power to him. California is a great example of what happens when good intentions get steam-rollered by extreme ideology.

-KeithP

 

[Vic]

Been living in California since 1974…more power to him. California is a great example of what happens when good intentions get steam-rollered by extreme ideology.

-KeithP

Kind of a blanket statement there when what happened is that it's one of the wealthiest and most technologically developed places on earth.

 

[K1052]

Been living in California since 1974…more power to him. California is a great example of what happens when good intentions get steam-rollered by extreme ideology.

-KeithP

California has really gone down hill *checks notes* to become the 5th largest economy on the planet.

 

[hal2kilo]

The land in question was already slated for oil and gas exploration, that process was stopped because of fracking concerns not being addressed in the environmental impact reports. The reports have been completed and the process is moving forward. This all started well before Trump was elected.

Oh I'm sure the reports have been completed by Trump's political appointees.

 

[Greenman]

Oh I'm sure the reports have been completed by Trump's political appointees.

OK?
The simple reality is that our entire economy depends on oil, and being independent of foreign control over that absolutely critical resource is a very good idea.
I look forward to the day that the US is entirely electric produced by sun, wind, and fusion power. But until that day oil rules our economy and our way of life. Once we're on clean power, it's easy enough to shut those wells down.

 

[theeedude]

GOP is at war with California. So are their oil and gas industry handlers. The best response for the average person is to use less gas, bike or take public transport to work, buy an electric car and help snuff them both out. I know it's somewhat less convenient, but it's a war, and this is a small price to pay to win it.

 

[Greenman]

GOP is at war with California. So are their oil and gas industry handlers. The best response for the average person is to use less gas, bike or take public transport to work, buy an electric car and help snuff them both out. I know it's somewhat less convenient, but it's a war, and this is a small price to pay to win it.

That's all sensible, except the electric car part. Without knowing how that electricity was produced, you can't assume it was from a renewable source.

 

[Moonbeam]

The answer is to put Trump in jail before he destroys the country completely. Cull the insane from government. We can't have people running around who think they are God issuing orders. It's sure to be a disaster. Too bad the Putin Party is in the way.

 

[theeedude]

That's all sensible, except the electric car part. Without knowing how that electricity was produced, you can't assume it was from a renewable source.

In California, there is a pretty good chance that it is. You can always put up solar panels yourself if you aren't sure.

 

[Vic]

That's all sensible, except the electric car part. Without knowing how that electricity was produced, you can't assume it was from a renewable source.

The electricity doesn't have to come from a renewable source because, all else being equal, electric vehicles are twice as efficient as ICE vehicles, regardless of the energy source. In fact, the only way for an electric vehicle to be less efficient than an ICE vehicle would be if the electric vehicle were powered by electricity generated by running an ICE vehicle on a dyno.

 

[Brainonska511]

That's all sensible, except the electric car part. Without knowing how that electricity was produced, you can't assume it was from a renewable source.

It's practically guaranteed that an electric car will be better for the environment than any ICE car, even after you factor in electricity sources (based on national averages for power generation). Even in West Virginia, where a substantial portion of power comes from coal powered plants, an electric car would still be better than an ICE car, over the useful life of the vehicle.

 

[Greenman]

It's practically guaranteed that an electric car will be better for the environment than any ICE car, even after you factor in electricity sources (based on national averages for power generation). Even in West Virginia, where a substantial portion of power comes from coal powered plants, an electric car would still be better than an ICE car, over the useful life of the vehicle.

Does that include production of the batteries?

 

[theeedude]

Does that include production of the batteries?

Then you also have to include the energy spent manufacturing ICE and transmission components, lubricants, etc, and exploring, developing, refining, and transporting oil and gasoline.

 

[Vic]

It's practically guaranteed that an electric car will be better for the environment than any ICE car, even after you factor in electricity sources (based on national averages for power generation). Even in West Virginia, where a substantial portion of power comes from coal powered plants, an electric car would still be better than an ICE car, over the useful life of the vehicle.

Seriously, ICE vehicles operate at 25% efficiency at best. And that's not even factoring in the efficiency losses of refining and distributing the gas/diesel. Electric cars are pushing 50-60% efficiency including the costs of generating and distributing the electricity.

Sometimes I feel that many of the people in this debate are just stuck in the past. Like when electric cars were hardly better than golf carts, when solar panels were expensive and barely worked on a sunny day, or when emissions robbed power and ethanol gas would eat the gaskets in your carburetor. The future is sure gonna be shock for some..

 

[Moonbeam]

Seriously, ICE vehicles operate at 25% efficiency at best. And that's not even factoring in the efficiency losses of refining and distributing the gas/diesel. Electric cars are pushing 50-60% efficiency including the costs of generating and distributing the electricity.

Sometimes I feel that many of the people in this debate are just stuck in the past. Like when electric cars were hardly better than golf carts, when solar panels were expensive and barely worked on a sunny day, or when emissions robbed power and ethanol gas would eat the gaskets in your carburetor. The future is sure gonna be shock for some..

Science..............Bah

 

[Greenman]

Then you also have to include the energy spent manufacturing ICE and transmission components, lubricants, etc, and exploring, developing, refining, and transporting oil and gasoline.

I'd agree with that. I'm not sure how far down the supply chain we should go, but absolutely the various components and systems have to be figured into it.
Electrics are the future of transportation, if we had batteries with enough energy density we could dump ICE's tomorrow.

 

[Vic]

Does that include production of the batteries?

Yes. I'll say it again, all else being equal, the only way for an electric vehicle to be less efficient than an ICE is if the electric vehicle is powered by electricity generated by an ICE vehicle.

I'm sure you'll come around though when you can buy an electric truck that can tow a train and yet is cheaper to own and operate than any comparable ICE truck.

 

[Vic]

I'd agree with that. I'm not sure how far down the supply chain we should go, but absolutely the various components and systems have to be figured into it.
Electrics are the future of transportation, if we had batteries with enough energy density we could dump ICE's tomorrow.

The energy density is good enough now that that's really only an issue for aircraft. For cars, the problem now is almost completely infrastructure.

 

[Brainonska511]

Does that include production of the batteries?

Yes, even with the production of batteries.

Do you ask the same question when it comes to drilling for oil and refining it into gasoline?

 

[Greenman]

Yes, even with the production of batteries.

Do you ask the same question when it comes to drilling for oil and refining it into gasoline?

No. We already know what those amounts are, the issue is comparing them to battery power. Gas becomes the baseline, battery production and the pollution created by that process will will be more, less, or the same.
If all we're doing is exporting the pollution to another location, it's pointless. If the overall pollution, including the supply chain for both systems, is lower for electrics then it's a net plus and worth doing.
I don't know the answer to that question, that's why I asked.

 

[zinfamous]

Seriously, ICE vehicles operate at 25% efficiency at best. And that's not even factoring in the efficiency losses of refining and distributing the gas/diesel. Electric cars are pushing 50-60% efficiency including the costs of generating and distributing the electricity.

Sometimes I feel that many of the people in this debate are just stuck in the past. Like when electric cars were hardly better than golf carts, when solar panels were expensive and barely worked on a sunny day, or when emissions robbed power and ethanol gas would eat the gaskets in your carburetor. The future is sure gonna be shock for some..

the present is already too much of a shock for many, if they ever realize it.

 

[K1052]

No. We already know what those amounts are, the issue is comparing them to battery power. Gas becomes the baseline, battery production and the pollution created by that process will will be more, less, or the same.
If all we're doing is exporting the pollution to another location, it's pointless. If the overall pollution, including the supply chain for both systems, is lower for electrics then it's a net plus and worth doing.
I don't know the answer to that question, that's why I asked.

UoCS analyzed this back in 2015 and: