Trump pulls the US out of the Paris Accord. And the long-suffering Green New Deal is on the deathbed in Europe.
Joining Forces in Europe
Euractiv reports France’s Far-Right Asks EPP to End the Green Deal Together.
French far-right leader Jordan Bardella senses an opening for a right-wing coalition to tear down the European Green Deal.
Bardella, chairman of the European Parliament’s far-right Patriots for Europe grouping and president of Marine Le Pen’s National Rally, said Monday morning that he would ask Manfred Weber, leader of the center-right European People’s Party, to “join forces” and halt the European Union’s efforts to curb climate change.
Bardella’s move, made during his New Year’s address to the French press, comes after EPP leaders attacked the bloc’s green legislation last week.
Describing the Green Deal, a package of measures aiming to make the EU climate-neutral by 2050, as a constraint on economic growth, he also cited the return of United States President Donald Trump as a reason for putting environmental legislation on hold.
Bardella said he would write to Weber as well as the leaders of the far-right Europe of Sovereign Nations and right-wing European Conservatives and Reformists groupings to “propose we join forces to propose the suspension of the Green Deal in response to the extremely attractive measures for the economy and for businesses … that Donald Trump is going to introduce in the United States.”
The European far right has long opposed the Green Deal. But Bardella’s comments came after several leading EPP figures — as well as France’s centrist government — demanded revisions or outright repeals of core Green Deal legislation last week.
He specifically cited Polish President Donald Tusk’s recent criticism of EU climate measures, saying he had “listened with interest” to the EPP politician’s remarks.
Even the Center Seeks Change
Also note France urges Brussels to indefinitely delay EU green rules for business
France is pushing to delay EU rules requiring companies to report on their environmental footprint and exposure to climate risk and to check that their suppliers comply with environmental and forced labor rules.
In a document obtained by POLITICO and dated Jan. 20, France pushed to delay indefinitely a new European directive on corporate due diligence (CSDDD) and to delay by two years the corporate sustainability reporting directive (CSRD).
“The French authorities are in favor of delaying sine die the entry into force of the [CSDDD] directive,” reads the document.
“The delay must give the necessary time to improve the directive,” the document added, specifically regarding its scope, which France argues should not apply to companies smaller than 5,000 employees and whose revenue does not exceed €1.5 billion.
“We need to focus on legislation that complicates the daily lives of your companies and slows down their growth,” French economy minister Eric Lombard said on Thursday in his annual new year greetings, calling for a simplification of the CSRD and for postponing the due diligence directive until the day “it will be simplified.”
The European Commission is expected to unveil this review, known as the omnibus, on Feb. 26.
Earlier this month, French President Emmanuel Macron also made that message clear. “We need to make a massive regulatory break, but we also need to review regulations, including recent ones, which are hampering our ability to innovate,” Macron said.
Germany also called for a two-year delay to the implementation of the reporting rules, as well as “a significant reduction in the content of CSRD,” in a letter addressed to von der Leyen dated Dec. 17.
The End of Green Nonsense
The current German coalition includes the Green party. I highly doubt Greens will be any part of the next government.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen will try to put a brave face on this, but effectively the Green Deal heads to the ash heap of history where it belongs.
Europe will have its hands full with Trump’s tariffs, their own immigration issues, the deindustrialization of Germany, and Trump’s demand for 5 percent of GDP on defense to have any time for Green nonsense.
The German request for a 2-year delay will morph into an 8-year delay with France, Italy, Poland and Hungary, at a minimum, in on the suspension.
Trump Pulls the US Out of the Paris Accord
Meanwhile, back in the US, Here’s what to know about Trump’s executive actions on climate and environment.
Pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement
Trump signed an executive order Monday directing the United States to again withdraw from the landmark Paris climate agreement aimed at global cooperation on climate change.
The agreement requires participating countries to come up with nationally determined contributions to the effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions that are heating the planet. Trump’s move means the federal government won’t be trying to meet emissions reductions goals, nor any financial commitments to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Declaring a “national energy emergency,” doubling down on oil and gas
Trump declared an energy emergency via executive order amid a promise to “drill, baby, drill.”
The order urges oil and gas expansion including through federal use of eminent domain and the Defense Production Act, which allow the government to use private land and resources to produce goods deemed to be a national necessity.
Revoke Biden’s goals on electric vehicles
Trump promised to eliminate what he incorrectly calls Biden’s “electric vehicle mandate.”
What that means in practice is that the order will revoke a non-binding goal set by Biden to have EVs make up half of new cars sold by 2030. He will also likely seek repeal of a $7,500 tax credit for new EV purchases approved by Congress as part of Biden’s landmark 2022 climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act.
Eliminate a push for environmental justice
When the government reviews new facilities that emit pollution, officials are no longer likely to consider a concept known as environmental justice, or how that new pollution will add to the emissions that have tended to fall more heavily on poor and minority communities.
Those are sweeping moves that Rena Payan, chief program officer at nonprofit Justice Outside, called “rolling back decades of progress in addressing environmental discrimination.”
Three Out of Four Ain’t Bad
The idea we have a national energy emergency is nonsense, but I agree with Trump on the rest.
The Paris Accord was never ratified by the US Senate so Trump is not breaking a legitimate deal.
Related Posts
I continue to call them as I see them, trying to avoid politics.
January 26: Praise Trump for Ending DEI. But Unrooting Infestation Will Take Time
DEI infestation is still pervasive at Universities, especially the University of Colorado. How do we rectify that?
January 29: Trump Bashes the Fed Again, Cites DEI and Fake Climate Change
Trump is not happy with the Fed’s decision to hold rates steady today.
January 29: Trump Announces New Tariffs on Computer Chips and Semiconductors
Trump goes after Taiwan in a spat over semiconductors.
TURN OFF WHEN NOT IN USE. U.S.Army wall plate sticker, circa 1980’s. Infinite load kills not-infinite power supply. Wise use, eh.
I always wonder how much of this is already baked in on a fairly permanent basis. For 2024, electricity production in the EU came first from nuclear, then wind power, natural gas, hydro power, solar (for the first time passing coal), and then finally coal power. https://ember-energy.org/latest-insights/european-electricity-review-2025/
That’s quite a bit of ‘green’; I doubt that just disappears overnight since it’s already in service
Green New Deal is ‘brain’ dead. That modifier makes the statement more complete.
“Describing the Green Deal, a package of measures aiming to make the EU climate-neutral by 2050, as a constraint on economic growth, he also cited the return of United States President Donald Trump as a reason for putting environmental legislation on hold.”
So, between eating (which requires not too many crop failures due to extreme weather) and having money, you should absolutely choose having money and get hungry tomorrow. Because money makes crops magically survive.
And the fact that the United States has a leader that literally asked people to get sick with a deadly disease to see him, and recently claimed that coal doesn’t burn when hit with a bomb, is clearly a reason to follow his lead.
We all know that the average voter is stupid, but when are we going to realise that the average politician is just as stupid, at least in NATO countries? (I’m saying this only because I don’t follow politics in Asia, and I’m holding to the hope that reason still prevails somewhere.) And what the hell is legitimate in a government of stupid people voted by stupid people?
I have long said that the “green agenda” was hijacked by corporations decades ago. Who really wants all of the chemicals used in “modern” farming in their food? Is it really a bad thing to reduce air pollution? Reducing energy usage for heating and cooling homes can be done by requiring more insulation. There have been 100+ mpg carburetors around since the 1930s, and car engines that run on tap water for at least 30 years. Diesel engines were designed to run on vegetable oil. I guy in my city ran his Volkswagon Rabbit, for years, on used oil from restaurant fryers. Shopping malls and their franchises killed local businesses, including hardware stores and lumber yards that used to be within walking distance. The corporations are the ones promoting the phony part of the “green agenda”, like the cataclysmic climate change narrative, because they see money in it. It’s not the “green agenda” per se, rather the corporate hijacked part of it, that is the problem. The climate has always changed. How else could there have been rain forests under the polar ice caps?
Four more years with puppet Harris at the helm would have been the death knell of the USA as we knew it. We would have been under a totalitarian dictatorship run by the globalists that owned her and every aspect of our lives would have been monitored for our carbon output and tied to a social credit score.
So the citizens don’t want to see poverty and an authoritarian dictatorship controlling every aspect of their lives. Sounds good to me and every other sentient being other than the WEF totalitarians.
Trump now rescuing the world. WINNING!!!!
Notice, always far right never anything about FAR LEFT or ALT LEFT. The medias obsession with controlling thought is pathetic.
Disagreeing with anything even lightly to a liberal agenda automatically labels you as far right in the MSM eyes.
You are still locked in 2018. We are steamrolling them.
Hi Mish. Regarding your question of what it would take for US refiners to upgrade to process more domestic light oil. I am not a refinery expert. So I cannot give you a detailed rundown of refinery processes and costs to upgrade, though I have read many papers and analyses on how refineries struggle with light shale oil.
I do know that US refiners are using 6 mbpd of domestic light, which they mix with 3.5 mbpd of domestic heavy, and 6.5 mbpd of imported heavy. Total of 16 mbpd of crude.
Total US refinery capacity is a max 18 mbpd, but the typical run rate is 16 mbpd. Even if we could use all our 10 mbpd of light shale oil and 3.5 mbpd of heavy, we would still need to import another 2.5 mbpd of heavy to get to 16 mbpd.
Going forward, there are many problems with our refining processes. 1. Conventional heavy crude production has been declining and will continue to decline going forward. 2. We are also going to start running out of light shale oil. Production should begin a slow decline within a few years. 3. Shale oil is getting lighter and lighter as time passes, making it even harder to use in our refineries. 4. The amount of water that we need to dispose of from the fracking process is getting to be too much to deal with. 5. Our refineries are getting older and older. Although we retrofit and upgrade some of them all the time, we are also shutting many down. 6. Logistics. Our Midwest refiners have very little access to our own domestic light. New pipelines would also need to be constructed. All their heavy crude is imported by pipelines from Canada.
A better solution, in my opinion, would be to build a couple of brand new refineries that could process light shale oil, close to the current producing regions. Perhaps Trump could make this happen. Though by the time the refineries are built in 5-10 years time, how much light shale oil will still be left to process?
Hope that helps.
We have five hundred years of clean burning coal.
Yes. And we are using less and less of it as time passes. When Trump was elected in 2016, he promised to MAGA with clean, beautiful coal. It was just another empty promise:
“145 coal-burning units at 75 power plants have been idled during Trump’s time in office (“the fastest decline in coal-fuel capacity in any single presidential term”). Power generated from coal has dropped from 31% to 20%. Coal production is down 34% (“the largest four-year drop in production since at least 1932”). And some 5,000 coal miners — nearly 10% of the workforce — have lost their jobs while Trump has been president. Not only has Trump not brought back the coal industry, he hasn’t even been able to slow its decline.”
https://www.mining.com/web/trump-didnt-save-coal-or-steel-to-be-fair-no-one-could/
By the end of 2023, power generated by coal was down to 16%.
I don’t hear Trump talk about America’s clean beautiful coal anymore. Do you?
Trump let the market sort coal out. Sounds like a win win for the greenies
That isn’t what he promised those in the coal industry.
And now he has replaced “beautiful clean coal” with a new slogan: “drill baby drill”. The problem is, he expects US oil and gas firms to drill their brains out, overproduce, drop the price to $40, bleed red ink, and put themselves out of business. The breakeven cost for a new shale well is $65. And this will only go up as we put tariffs on imported steel and equipment used in the oil and gas industry.
I do not expect US companies to follow Trump’s demands.
Beautiful clean burning coal
when is trump going to demand the Chinese to stop their AI research and demand that North Korea hand over their nukes
Ha! Trump doesn’t talk softly, but does he carry a big stick?https://asiatimes.com/2025/01/trump-doesnt-talk-softly-but-does-he-carry-a-big-stick/
Thanks Mish. Off-topic and lengthy, but many will be interested:
This is from attorney © 2022, Jeff Childers, all rights reserved of Coffee&Covid.
🔥🔥🔥
The President’s enemies are beginning to awaken to the formidible possibility that Trump knows exactly what he is doing and is setting traps for them to fall into. The New York Times covered the story yesterday under the headline, “Trump’s Firings Could Bring Court Cases That Expand His Power.” (The article even mentioned our beloved Ms. Fong.)
image 6.png
Bye, Charlotte Burrows, Obama-appointed EEOC Commissioner, who believed she was untouchable.
Over the past several days, the President has “abruptly fired dozens of officials,” if not hundreds of them. The Times, at least, is beginning to detect a figure of rationality emerging from the fog of administrative war. It claims to have uncovered a pattern among Trump’s firings of powerful federal actors who thought they were safe. These included the 17 aforementioned Inspector Generals (including high-heeled rebel Fong), plus cemented-in officials from agencies like the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
Note that all four categories include officials appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.
Astonishingly, Trump’s mass firings of top-level commissioners from the NLRB, the Privacy Board, and the EEOC, were thought to be illegal and impossible. But even more historic and astonishing, Trump has fired so many it leaves those agencies without quora. They are dead in the water. These now-paralyzed agencies literally cannot undermine Trump’s agenda, even if they wanted to, for the practical reason that there simply aren’t enough commissioners left to vote on anything. They’re frozen.
image 7.png
Strikingly, none of the “abruptly fired” officials have yet sued the federal government—even though Trump is trampling on all sorts of precedents, customs, and statutes. Ms. Fong merely staged a bizarre mini-protest rather than assert her legal rights. All this legal restraint is especially strange considering that in at least one agency, the NLRB, federal law expressly limits the President’s ability to fire commissioners except in very limited circumstances.
The Times and the fired officials smelled a Trump trap.
“The prospect of getting dragged into court,” an alarmed Times observed, “may be exactly what Mr. Trump’s lawyers are hoping for.” What terrified and dismayed the far-left Times and its progressive allies was the ghastly prospect that “any rulings in the president’s favor would establish precedents that would expand presidential power to control the federal government.”
In other words: Trump is hoping that they’ll sue him.
The New York Times began connecting the dots starting with a Reagan-era constitutional interpretation of broad Executive Branch power. The Reaganites believed “that presidents must be able to fire any executive branch official at will.”
image 5.png
“In recent years,” the Times realized with growing horror, “the Supreme Court’s majority — led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who worked in the White House Counsel’s Office under the Reagan administration — has pushed that idea” of broad executive powers in employment.
Reagan called his constitutional interpretation “unitary executive theory.” It is an uncomplicated view of constitutional separation of powers, holding that the president must exclusively control his own executive branch. Any laws passed by Congress (under Article II) purporting to make Article I executive branch officials independent from the president’s sole control must therefore be unconstitutional.
Hahaha! The mass firings are genius! Trump has got progressives doubting their own theory of permanent federal employment. The President has tied these people into pretzel-like political knots. They literally don’t know what to do.
The Times’ reporter spoke to the 17 Inspectors General —Ms. Fong’s cohort— and asked them when are you going to sue the Orange Man? The depressing answer was: we’re not sure. They worry they might be playing right into Trump’s hands:
image 8.png
Haha! Can you see it now? The sheer brilliance of Trump’s plan? If they do sue him, then Trump is likely to grow even more powerful. Their only other option to just take it.
😷 Back in April 2021, I won my first and biggest mask case at Florida’s First District Court of Appeal. The three-judge panel agreed that mandatory mask ordinances were presumptively unconstitutional. Normally, in response the County and its squidlike mask allies would have appealed that decision up to Florida’s Supreme Court. But they didn’t. They took the “L,” even though my victory deleted mask mandates in 33 of Florida’s 67 counties, and created a significant legal precedent.
Why did they just take the “L”? It was because, if they also lost at Florida’s Supreme Court, it would have outlawed mandatory masking in all 67 Florida counties. They didn’t want to risk it. Better to live with losing 33 masking counties rather than risk the whole Sunshine State.
🔥 As far as the Times can tell, all these far-left, fired appointees —many, like Ms. Fong, even appointed by Republican presidents, but still— they all seem to be leaning toward taking the “L” too. None so far have filed a single lawsuit. It turns out that, despite the Democrats’ howls of protest, the legal limits on presidential hiring and firing might not be quite so constitutional after all, and they know it:
image 9.png
How about that? Now the Times tells us there are serious questions over whether Congress can limit a president’s power to fire his own employees.
Hamlet once asked, to sue or not to sue, that is the question. (It was in an earlier draft of the play.) That is the question confounding the Democrats right now. They just don’t seem to have any ideas. In fact, many of the article’s comments were white-hot with fury since the Times only presented the problem, not any solution.
Astonishingly, none of the Times’ “legal experts” quoted in the article offered any possible strategy to counter the President’s maneuver. Not one. That’s partly why I called Trump’s plan “brilliant,” since there are no clear countermoves. It’s also why I called the Resisters cowards, because, at least so far, they’ve refused the risks of lawfare, too chicken to stand up for their principles in a fair fight.
The Deep State’s usual tactics—delay and sabotage—aren’t effective against this mass-firing strategy. Bureaucratic slow-walking and procedural hurdles are great for stalling policies, but they don’t work, can’t work, when an agency’s entire leadership has been physically removed by security. Bye, Felicia.
🔥 If Congress wants these crippled agencies, like the EEOC, to resume function, they will have to wait for Trump to nominate replacement commissioners and then the Senate must consent. But Trump won’t do that until his Cabinet nominations are heard first. So, the firings also pressure the Senate to confirm quicker.
🔥 Finally, take a moment to consider how much work was invested in carefully charting all these myriad agencies and, one by one, figuring out which bureaucrats to yank. They had it all ready to go on day one. That precise kind of detail and planning is what the Democrats now face. So it is unsurprising they remain in response mode, where they’ll stay until they can figure out what the heck is going on.
Sue? Or don’t sue? Is it a trap?
Everything we’ve seen suggests Trump has a deep bench of legal and administrative expertise—people who understand the intricate mechanics of the federal bureaucracy and know how to dismantle the procedural obstacles without sparking immediate legal defeats. And even better, they’re teeing up bigger legal victories.
Democrats and the media are still scrambling because they never expected Trump 2.0 to include this level of precision and premeditation. I hate to keep saying it, but we’re seeing something that’s never happened before. Against all odds, Trump is really doing it.
He’s taking the government back for the people.
“…or how that new pollution will add to the emissions that have tended to fall more heavily on poor and minority communities.”
The smog was really bad here in the 1980’s. It was equal economic opportunity smog. Those next to the coast had the better air. The wealthy to the east, in Pasadena had the same bad air as the lower classes did. One of my middle class co-workers lived near the oil refinery located south of LAX, near El Segundo Beach. It didn’t look like a minority or poor community, the one time i visited him.
The Great Leap Forward killed 10’s of millions. Mao wanted to be the leader in steel production so he took the farmers. Unfortunately they could only make garbage iron but the damage was done. Nobody was making the food.
The Green New Deal has the potential to kill a lot more because it’s global and the leaders of it are an army of psychopaths and criminals.
And today, China is leading the world in steel production and steel exports. They produce 54% of all the steel in the world.
Not to mention cement, chemical fertilizers, pharma, electronics etc.
And they lead the world in building nuclear reactors, solar, wind, batteries, EVs, and rare earths.
China leads the world in pollution:
https://www.numbeo.com/pollution/rankings_by_country.jsp
China ranks 61st on quality of life. Even India beat them out. US ranks 15th:
https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp
Yep. When you produce most of the world’s steel, cement, rare earths, electronics etc., it all comes with a lot of pollution. If we could figure out how to produce more of those things here competitively, then we would increase our pollution quite a bit as well.
And when you burn all that coal for electricity, that’s even more pollution.
But China has a long term plan to reduce all that pollution. And it starts with reducing use of fossil fuels, by massively building out nuclear, hydro, and renewables. Something that we won’t be doing.
They are also reducing pollution in their major cities through massive adoption of EVs, PHEVs, and CNG vehicles.
An interesting side effect of all those EVs and PHEVs, besides reduced pollution in cities, is an odd one. China’s cities are becoming quieter without the noise pollution from all those ICE vehicles. Not a big deal, but an interesting side effect.
What is the side effect of China building 100 coal plants each year minus the same scrubber tech we use that puts out essentially predominately CO2 and not nearly the same particulates as the Chinese plants?
Perhaps you can provide me with the evidence that China does not put pollution controls on new coal plants? Or did you just make that up?
Because this article from 2017 says that new Chinese coal plants have stricter and better pollution controls that US coal plants.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/everything-think-know-coal-china-wrong/
We wont be doing that because of permitting and court costs.
How long would it take to permit a new nuclear plant in the US?
How long in China?
Can you imagine the mass hysteria if a new hydro dam was proposed in the US!! Hell a coal plant may have an easier time.
But hey Papa just tell them we have a long term plan….I’m sure that will speed permitting & end the court battles.
Meanwhile our coal plant scheduled for closing in 2024 has been extended indefinitely. The gall of us peasants wanting to keep the lights on…..could had a pipeline.
Our most recent nuclear plant, Vogtle 4, was permitted in 2012, began construction in 2013 and began operating in 2024. In comparison, China can build a new reactor in 5-7 years.
Yes, China can build them much faster and cheaper. So they will. They also need them more than we do.
We have an advantage over China however: abundant, inexpensive natural gas. And since the LCOE of a natural gas power plant is about half of a nuclear plant, we are going to keep building more natural gas plants. As well as solar and onshore wind, which have similar costs to natural gas.
Coal is more expensive than all of the above.
Thanks for pointing this out PapaDave, I had not even considered this bonus! When talking millions of quiet vehicles around the Globe, I dare say this is truly an “Added Benefit” many didn’t realize!
I live amongst nature, so to me this is a Beautiful Bonus!!
We disturb plenty of Nature, and Humanity with Noise, so anything to quiet things down a notch, is Marvelous in my World!
They also build 100 coal plants each year.
Yes. The standard, simple minded, narrative. I’ve heard it a thousand times. Congratulations on being the 1001st to tell me that.
Yes. China is still building coal plants. Because they need more and more energy each year as they develop their economy. And they use whatever is available, including coal. People all over the world will burn dung and garbage if necessary, to prevent the lights from going out. China is no different.
They also import 11 mbpd of oil. The most in the world.
But they are also currently building 29 nuclear reactors and plan on completing 100 over the next decade. The US is currently building zero. And the US is currently planning zero.
And they are building more renewables each year than the US has in total.
They have built 30,000 miles of new electrical grids that are the most advanced in the world.
It’s all part of their plan to ween themselves off of imported fossil fuels and rely on domestic energy sources, that over time, will result in fewer emissions.
And they lead the world in the construction of new coal plants.
No one else is even close. India is doing its best.
I know…they have pinky sworn to reduce their emissions.
Post their emissions chart
It would put this climate bs to bed. The West chase cow farts
with wind mills and chicom solar panels.
Thanks so much. You are now the 1002nd person to tell me that China is building a lot of coal plants.
C’mon papa your supposed to tell us that they are clean coal plants.
Coal is still very dirty. Even with pollution controls. If China had access to more natural gas, like we do, they would be using that instead. Gas generation is half the price of coal AND half the pollution.
meanwhile Kansas faces one of the largest tuberculosis outbreaks in US history https://abcnews.go.com/…/kansas-faces-largest…/story…
Not all is bad removing the tsa from our lives is a good thing but to maga you have to let the free market do its job not cronyism.about the planet that we are killing it that is a stretch the planet will be here for a few more years after we are gone.
The Green Deal focused primarily on emissions and the far greater problem is the trashing of the planet with plastic and other trash. It’s so bad now there is no where on earth that doesn’t have tiny plastic particles. And that plastic is now filling up brains across all living organism, no wonder everyone is getting dumber.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/21/microplastics-brain-pollution-health
But don’t worry, I can assure you absolutely nothing will be done to address this issue so your plastics job is safe.
I have been harping on the subject of Plastic Waste for years: IT IS BY FAR the BIGGEST ISSUE that our planet IS facing. NOTHING will be done because it is FAR TOO LATE NOW, right?
THANK YOU! Like I bright flashing light that few want to see
Popular Plastic Ingredient to DNA Damagehttps://scitechdaily.com/harvard-study-links-popular-plastic-ingredient-to-dna-damage/ Microplastics in the bloodstream can induce cerebral thrombosishttps://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adr8243
Not something so easily solved, is it? The monitor and keyboard i’m using has plastic. The printer, the phone, the surge protector, the pen. What is the replacement for plastic water and milk bottles? I’ve noticed that Amazon has apparently stopped using bubble wrap. Plastic shopping bags are being outlawed in CA. The trees are starting to worry again.
The trees for producing paper were always special plantations with fast growing and harvesting procedures. The paper producing conglomerates ran their own plantations.
Nothing like the irreplaceable vast amount of equatorial and tropical rain-forests Teak and Mahogany etc which were annihilated for the planting of nutrient hungry palm oil which was used to make Bio-diesel for the Europeans.
ECB up shortly. Expected to cut 25 basis
fourth quarter GDP
France -0.1%
Italy 0.0%
Germany -0.2%
Eur 0.0%
Stagnant is kind way of putting it in Europe.
Europe is an economically suicidal socialist fascist dictatorship.
Been a good short.
They seem to be understanding world is moving on and they are last in a long dusty column.
It will be about energy in 21st century so how that gets produced remains defining element.
Your description of leadership is spot on. People however are finding being last not very palatable. Change is coming to Europe.
Still attempting to get a handle on it all.
Scalping and some swing trading appropriate, Macro has too much market risk imo. Longer a position is open more market risk.
Dead Green, DEI…will lower the federal gov size. Federal gov workers: US 22 millions, EU: 24 millions, China: 45 million ex contractors. The federal gov in the US and EU will loosen their grip over their citizens. More power and freedom to the people and more border control. The globalist are more loyal to China than the US, under the banner of free trade.
And we are within 3-5 years of nuclear making a major come back. Hopefully, these SMR companies can drive down the cost quickly. Time will tell, and I certainly hope Helion Energy will deliver promising news with its Polaris fusion reactor in 2025.
While solar & wind are important and will remain so, they do have major drawbacks in terms of operational lifespans. Solar is about 25 years while wind is about 20 years. And both require batteries to really be effective over a 7x24x365 timeframe.
Solar and Wind TAKE OIL to manufacture their parts and they are a nightmare once they break. Disposing of the huge parts of a windmill are already causing issues.
I don’t expect SMRs to be in wide use anytime soon. We have been using them for decades in specialty applications like subs, ships, and remote locations where cost does not matter. So we can build them, and we know they work. But they will not become widespread, until costs come down.
There has been a big push in the last decade to develop low cost SMRs all over the world. After all that time and tremendous spending, no one has been able to make them cost competitive. And until someone comes up with a technological breakthrough, they are just as much a pipe dream as fusion,
Where the tech breakthroughs have been happening is in renewables and batteries. Solar panel costs have declined dramatically, while efficiency keeps improving. Battery costs have also declined 90% in the last 15 years.
“There has been a big push in the last decade to develop low cost SMRs all over the world.”
I would totally disagree. It’s only been 2 years or so that we’ve seen a big push towards SMRs. Prior to that, I’m sure a handful of US companies have been laboring away at perfecting their designs; however it would be greatly exaggerated to suggest there’s been a big push over the last decade. Funding has really only spun up since NuScale & TerraPower have moved forward with permitting for their first plants and that was not 10 years ago.
The problem is not with the technology. The problem is with the over burdensome regulations. Now, I don’t want the US to deploy dangerous SMRs, but it would be very naive to think the regulatory scrutiny can’t be sped up quite a bit.
America should have never suspended reprocessing of uranium. This was a massively limiting decision by Carter that put the US nuclear power industry so far behind China, France, etc that really nothing else compares. The cost to build the two new reactors at Plant Vogle skyrocketed from $14B to $30B, and the vast majority of that was from the over burdensome regulatory environment that has been established since 1979 when 3 Mile Island.
Final Fact: 3 Mile Island put America behind 40 years in the Nuclear Power Race
Experts determined that the approximately 2 million people in the nearby area during the accident were exposed to small amounts of radiation. The estimated average radiation dose was about 1 millirem above the area’s natural background of about 100-125 millirem per year. To put this into further context, exposure from a chest X-ray is about 6 millirem. The accident’s exposure had no detectable health effects on the plant workers or surrounding public.
The military has been using SMRs since 1955. That’s 70 years of time to develop cheaper, better, more efficient, and lower cost SMRs. And it hasn’t happened after all that time.
Commercial companies, like NuScale and TerraPower, started with great promise, but keep increasing their cost estimates as time passes, rather than lowering them. Pretty soon their estimated LCOE will be higher than conventional nuclear and coal. Which are both double the LCOE of natural gas, wind and solar.
China is also working on SMRs, Thorium Reactors, and Fusion but those are just as experimental as the ones being worked on here. In the meantime they are currently building 29 conventional reactors and plan on building another 70 in the next decade. They are building what they know will work, while they experiment with the other alternatives.
I do not expect to see a plethora of commercial SMRs anytime soon, unless someone is willing to overpay for the power.
70 years of military use DOES NOT represent a big push to commercialize them. That’s just wrong.
Define anytime soon? I’m saying we’re 3-5 years from the first practical deployments. I don’t have rose colored glasses thinking they’re going to come in way under budget. I am hopeful that they are successfully deployed and Trump’s SecEnergy is able to get them deployed sooner than current timelines call for.
Within 10 years, I would expect there to be at least 10 SMRs deployed of under construction. If Trump can speed things up, then this number may double.
I think we both want them to succeed. And one of use will be shown to be right: faster than expected or slower most likely due to cost.
My final point would be what chatter there is within the nuclear industry if it’s the later regarding burdensome regulations. I am hopeful we get a clearer picture of that within the first 9 months, seeing Trump’s administration making this a focus of their reduced regulations push.
Cheers, PapaD!
The real costs associated with legacy energy systems such as “fossil Fuels” and nuclear is the onerous regulatory costs, environmental studies and bureaucratic nonsense put in the path of implementing the construction and siting of new facilities.
The large energy companies are gaming the system.- Subsidiaries, causing artificial shortages etc.
– Trump pulls the US out of the Paris Accord. And the long-suffering Green New Deal is on the deathbed in Europe.
> Without Harris and Biden “Feeding The Beast” if you will, it can’t be paid for. Without the U.S. $$$ and Support, it’s dead on arrival! That should tell us “All” we need to know, right?
>> If other Countries around the World, are not willing to “Pay Up” then Why should the U.S. when we are far from one of the worst in the World, and in fact we are not even close!
– French far-right leader Jordan Bardella senses an opening for a right-wing coalition to tear down the European Green Deal.
> Most Excellent! Another Country willing to work within the framework that we have. Not willing to “Play God” with things they have had no control over, will never have control over, but there “God Complex” drives their insanity just the same…
– also cited the return of United States President Donald Trump as a reason for putting environmental legislation on hold.
> There’s your proof on that issue! No U.S. $$$, No Paris Agreement, DONE!!!
– Even the Center Seeks Change
> No U.S. $$$, No Deal…
– France is pushing to delay EU rules requiring companies to report on their environmental footprint and exposure to climate risk and to check that their suppliers comply with environmental and forced labor rules.
> Until She takes charge, does anybody truly care, or give a damn at all, what France has to say. They should just STFU and hope they don’t get kicked out of the EU with there track record of Misery…
>> Earlier this month, French President Emmanuel Macron also made that message clear. “Blah, Blah, Blah, who cares… He’s an absolute moron!
– The End of Green Nonsense
> “Thank You” Mr. Trump!! We appreciate your vision and intelligence on this matter!
– Pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement
> “Thank You” Mr. Trump!! We appreciate your vision and intelligence on this matter!
– Declaring a “national energy emergency,” doubling down on oil and gas.
> “Thank You” Mr. Trump!! We appreciate your vision and intelligence on this matter! What we don’t need, after we fill the SPR of course, we can SELL to the EU and others!
– Revoke Biden’s goals on electric vehicles
> > “Thank You” Mr. Trump!! We appreciate your vision and intelligence on this matter! I have been long awaiting this move of pure intelligence!!!
– The idea we have a national energy emergency is nonsense, but I agree with Trump on the rest.
> Agreed!
– The Paris Accord was never ratified by the US Senate so Trump is not breaking a legitimate deal.
> No, but He is sending a Clear Message, and that’s what’s important!
The idea that we could quickly transition away from fossil fuels was a dream. The only country that has a chance to be successful at this transition in my lifetime will be China. And they consider it an imperative because they don’t want to be so dependent on foreign energy imports. Not because they want to stop global warming. They are currently building 29 conventional nuclear reactors, while we are building zero. They are building more dams every year and expanding their hydro electric production, while we sit on our hands. They are building more solar and wind per year than we have in total. Over 50% of their personal autos sold are EV and PHEV. They have 25,000 miles of electric train tracks, which are mostly high speed. Over 50% of class 8 semi trucks sold are now CNG, EV, or FCV. And so on.
I do not know if their energy strategy will give yet them another competitive advantage over us, but they already have a competitive advantage is so many areas: solar and wind, batteries, rare earths, EVs and PHEVs, steel, pharma, manufacturing, high speed rail etc. It just seems reasonable to assume that they will dominate us in renewable energy as well.
But no matter how much China does, it won’t be able to slow global warming and climate change. Like everyone else, they are still dependent on fossil fuel use. And fossil fuel use will keep increasing world wide. Which means emissions will keep growing. CO2 levels (and other GHGs) will keep growing. And global warming, and the resulting climate change will keep getting worse, and costing us more each and every year.
This will become the biggest impediment to world wide economic growth in the coming decades, along with debt levels.
And all each of us can do as individuals is figure out how we can profit from it. Because we cannot do anything about it.
There is certainly things to do about it. EU currently generates 40% of its electricity from renewable sources. Target, which for now seems reasonable, is 42% for total energy demand by 2030. Target for 100% is 2050. Strange how americans dont give a shit about their future generations …
No, he’s right and you’re wrong – total fossil fuel consumption has increased under the green scam, as have carbon emissions. The sum total of these policies has done nothing toward “net zero” which is imaginary.
Even if Americans “gave a shit”, it wouldn’t matter.
Let me explain:
Don’t confuse “total energy” with “total electricity”. In Europe, 23% of total energy consumed is electricity. If 40% of total electricity is from renewables, that means just 9% of total energy is from renewables.
Even if Europe achieves 100% renewable electricity, that is still just 23% of total energy. The rest is still fossil fuels.
Meanwhile, in the US, 34% of total energy consumed is electricity. And 40% of it is from renewables, hydro and nuclear. So that is 14% vs Europe’s 9%.
Globally, after two decades of building $5 trillion of renewables, we have managed to reduce the fossil fuel component of global total energy consumption from 82% to 81%. And since total energy consumption keeps growing, our use of fossil fuels is still growing.
We have been running as fast as we can, yet we are still going backwards.
The best that can be said about renewables, is that they have reduced the rate of growth of fossil fuels by a small amount. But make no mistake, fossil fuel use will keep growing.
And since China is building more renewables each year than the rest of the world combined, they may be able to start to reduce their use of fossil fuels by the end of this decade. The rest of the world will keep using more.
You are correct. You are using power right now to post your thoughts here. Please unplug and stop using that dirty energy.
China expanded infrastructures, trains, industries, military, RE….but they don’t have enough energy to support it. Their patchwork is ridiculous. China might become a new Iran, suffering in the dark and the cold under the climate change. Their workers are doing nothing all per day, fermenting hazard to the leader.
Lol! That’s all pretty funny.
“Their workers are doing nothing all per day”
China dominates the world in exports of solar, wind, batteries, EVs, rare earths, steel, electronics, etc etc etc. Last month their exports were $335 billion US. Strange that they can do that with all their workers doing nothing.
“China expanded infrastructures, trains, industries, military, RE….but they don’t have enough energy to support it.”
China, like the vast majority of countries in the world, is a net energy importer. For example, they are the world’s largest importer of oil, at 11 mbpd. They import enough energy to meet their needs.
They want to change this for strategic and economic reasons. Which is why they are currently building 29 nuclear reactors, more hydro dams, and more renewables each year than the rest of the world combined. (And according to you, all with workers who stand around doing nothing.)
They are updating their grid and transforming their economy into one that runs on an ever-increasing amount of electricity. And you consider that a “patchwork”! Too funny!
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20241113-will-chinas-ultra-high-voltage-grid-pay-off-for-renewable-power
Good info regarding UHV, but I am puzzled by DC transmission. The generators produce AC which has to be converted to AC, then transformed at the destination for standard 110 or 240V devices.
Here is an AI generated summary:
Ultra-high voltage (UHV) transmission is used to transport large amounts of electrical power over long distances, and direct current (DC) is often preferred over alternating current (AC) for several reasons:
Overall, DC technology enhances the efficiency and reliability of power transmission, especially over long distances.
The sky is falling. Run and hide.
– And fossil fuel use will keep increasing world wide.
> Exactly!
Yes. The reality is that fossil fuel use will increase for the next few decades. This is required if we want to grow the economy and living standards around the word.
The downside, is that greenhouse gas emissions will increase as a result. Which will accelerate global warming and climate change. Which will reduce economic growth.
It’s a catch-22. But we are going to stay on this path because there is no viable alternative at this time.
I am not worried. If you have an unsolvable problem, AI to the rescue, or so I was made to believe. /s
I am not worried either. There is no reason to waste my own time and energy worrying about problems that I cannot personally solve. However, it is important to understand reality, in order to plan, prepare, and profit from it. Global warming and climate change are a reality that I cannot change, but one that I must understand.
Unfortunately, to counter the climate challenges, an individual has limited means. Logic would dictate to build multitude of small dams (which would also provide electricity) to catch floodwater during storms, and store water for droughts. All require planned effort and resources, all in short supply when a good portion of the population either doesn’t believe in climate change or is distracted by shenanigans elsewhere in the economy and society. I personally belong to the latter.
“… trying to avoid politics.”
In my analysis – I am not Republican or Democrat
I look at policies on a case by case basis and I am about the only one
This rings true. Because as a libertarian I would have expected you to come out against all Executive Orders as being unconstitutional.
One of the main reasons I am here Mish! Your integrity and for the most part, your fairness and ability to allow points of view, opposite of yours, but also valuable just the same!
Enjoy your day!
The Green New Deal was a horrible power grab. It took far more control and required far more tyranny than a reasonable movement should start with. The Paris Accords were a joke. Basically, they gave you a blank sheet of paper and said “write what you want”. If you the “pledges” of China, India, Pakistan … they were a joke. Pledged to get worse for a while, then maybe level off. Meanwhile the west pledged to destroy economies, standards of living, etc. I live by environmental principles … but right now environmentalism is a religion and it needs some sane leadership.
The US should match the rate of defense spending of other NATO countries.
The U.S. should “Defense Spend” at whatever rate is the correct level, to Protect Our Country! Who gives a care what NATO wants or does? We are protecting Ourselves!
Also, we should audit the DOD departments to see where they use the money. If a department fails an audit, it should receive less money until it can demonstrate how the money is used.
They have failed every audit for years. Anytime there is a huge pile of money, that is not closely monitored, stealing occurs. The theft is probably in the trillions over the past 20 years.
– Also, we should audit the DOD departments to see where they use the money.
> They are audited now, and I trust the new guy will get things done, and quickly and right!
– If a department fails an audit, it should receive less money until it can demonstrate how the money is used.
> They failed the Audit to get here? No Money! Fire the necessary people “Responsible” (Including 1 Manager, if and whenever necessary). Move On!
– They have failed every audit for years.
> A lot of people need to go… The New Guy will take care of this.
– Anytime there is a huge pile of money, that is not closely monitored, stealing occurs.
> A lot of people need to go… The New Guy will take care of this.
– The theft is probably in the trillions over the past 20 years.
> Let’s not go Hyperbolic…
I will. Thank you President Trump! 🇺🇸
Ok. Thanks, Trump.
Don’t thank him… thank meeeeee!