"This comes after the Biden administration reportedly threatened to raise them to 100 percent."

Seems to have moved past "reportedly": https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/us/politics/biden-china-tariffs.html

And 50% on chinese solar panels. I thought pretty much ALL solar panels come from china now so this is going to hurt. No doubt Biden will ramp up subsidies as the eco lobby screeches.

So increase tariffs and then increase subsidies - is that pure communism or the ultimate expression of capitalism ?

Pure cronyism!

"So increase tariffs and then increase subsidies - is that pure communism or the ultimate expression of capitalism ?"

Who knows, but what do you think the ultimate outcome will be of simply importing everything from China because they can knock it out cheaper?

I'm pretty sure there were a number of huge solar farms being built in some states of the US built prior to Trump getting in last time and the tariff's and trade embargoes imposed on solar panels and other stuff from China once he was in office meant that the panels for the farms became too expensive so the projects were scrapped and thousands of people lost their jobs.

Quoth El Reg: "offshore wind turbines have a taste for whale blood"

Hoping this will work out as well as his last headline campaign promise: Building a border wall, Mexico paying for it.

https://i.imgflip.com/1jesqs.jpg

Just keep Kristi Noem far away...

what about "Drain the swamp". That didn't happen either. He was probably thinking about the beaver.

He had a good handle on the beaver. Just reached out and grabbed it.

So logically if we built windfarms along the border that would keep out foreign whales !

You mean, along the Florida border to keep Trump out?

Florida isn't real - wake up sheeple !

>You mean, along the Florida border to keep Trump out?

Out or in ?

Hypothetically if we built a wall across Florida and turned it into a high security prison, and the president was trapped inside -

So exactly how do wind farms kill whales...? I'm confused on this. Trump didn't like them being visible from one of his golf resorts and then started complaining about them. But, I've seen/heard no reports on them killing whales. It's not like the blades are going into the water.

As for the electric car issue.... Much confusion and many issues. Some zoning rules say the chargers have to be in a garage or other building with the charging done in them, other say the equipment and charging has to be outside of structures. And then there's the Tesla degradation in quality creating issues (fires, mechanical and electrical failures) in the newer models. Where I am, you need your own charger as there are no "charging stations". And if you live in an apartment, you're up a creek as none have charging stations.

Thus saving the jobs of American coal miners. They have been produced before, and turbine tech has improved since they were.

I double dare El Reg to ask His Orangeness if this is on the table.

Biden and Trump trying to make green tech ever more expensive? Hmm. Probably not worth investing in anything. Just enjoy yourselves, spending your cash, whilst enjoying yourself is still possible.

Biden and Trump trying to make green tech ever more expensive?

Of course. Then the 10% for the big guys gets bigger. Like the $600bn or so being handed over to the Green blob as part of Biden's ironiically named 'Inflation Reduction Act'. Which will do anything but, as the UK & Europe's energy prices and inflation rate have shown.

Then there's whether Trump may have a point or not. The loony Left have been conditioned to hate him, and anything he stands for. They've also been conditioned to hate nuclear. And of course they've been conditioned to believe windmills are good for the environment, even when there's ample evidence that they're not. So that's based on correlation. Temperatures rise, CO2 follows, therefore CO2 must be the cause. Off-shore windmills have increased in the US, so have whale beachings. There does appear to be some evidence offshore windmills are responsible, but wind farmers want that $600bn, so just ignore the whales.

> The loony Left have been conditioned to …hate nuclear.

It might surprise you, Trump is not a member of the loony left, but of the loony right; who have also been conditioned to hate nuclear as it reduces the need for coal and oil, and political sponsors do need to be kept happy…

Do you have shares in tin foil (Aluminium) ???

Do you have shares in tin foil (Aluminium) ???

Do you have anything constructive to add? No? Just more projection, and insults. But Trump might not need to do anything. The US market is rigged somewhat differently to the UK. So a couple of large offshore dollar-farming projects were cancelled-

https://apnews.com/article/offshore-wind-orsted-cancellation-biden-new-jersey-3f2ff7c9832210ce862f6e7179fae439

The Danish wind energy developer Ørsted said this week it’s scrapping its Ocean Wind I and II projects off southern New Jersey due to problems with supply chains, higher interest rates and a failure to obtain the amount of tax credits the company wanted. Together, the projects were supposed to deliver over 2.2 gigawatts of power.

And there's more-

https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/wind-power/offshore/gone-with-the-wind-tracking-sunken-u-s-offshore-wind-projects/

With Equinor, Avangrid and BP & Shell also cancelling projects claiming they're uneconomic. Which is odd because the 'renewables' scumbags have also been claiming costs have been falling and whale-killing wind energy is the cheapest evah!

Funny how that works.

Another difference between the US and UK, which has also had projects cancelled is the US seems able to write better contracts. So the whale killers have having to also pay penalties for terminating those contracts. Producing evidence that windmills are responsible for the increasing number of whale deaths could be a convenient, and environmentally friendly way of covering up for the fact that wind is just totally uneconomic. The subsidy farmers can stil go after that $600bn by doing onshore wind, solar or a variety of other subsidy sucking scams. Obama's Solyndra showed just how much money can be made, so Biden's just after his windfall..

Burn, baby, burn ...

Do what you want, when you want, whatever turns you on, baby, and to hell with the consequences!

We don't think, we do.

It's all about me, we don't care about you.

I'm not to blame for the fucked up mess,

that's all behind me.

Some bunch of losers can take the hit,

for the fires and the floods,

and for believing my shit.

Some bunch of losers can take the hit,

Err.. right. Not entirely sure what you took a hit of, but I hope it's legal in your jurisdiction.

Meanwhile, back to the story. If windmills are killing whales and/or negative effects on marine life, isn't that a bad thing? Especially if you think you're environmentally friendly? Aren't we supposed to be, like, saving the planet or something?

Alternatively, given ecofreaks also like spurious correlations such as CO2 and temperature, you could just rename yourself and any children Eleanor. After that other famous Democrat, Roosevelt. Not the car because that might get you sued. But works for windfarms in Poland!

http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious/correlation/2239_popularity-of-the-first-name-eleanor_correlates-with_wind-power-generated-in-poland

> If windmills are killing whales and/or negative effects on marine life

We would know about it before the orangutan opened his mouth.

There are these people called scientists would monitor and investigate such matters and like to publish their findings…

Then a whole bunch of environmentalist and media outlets would see the story and give it wider coverage…

I could explain to you how you are 100% wrong about temperature change driving CO2 levels - but something tells me that a, you don't have the middle school level understanding of science required and b, you wouldn't listen and learn.

Then again, you also appear to think that correlation is causation.

a, you don't have the middle school level understanding of science required and b, you wouldn't listen and learn.

Projecting again. See the funny thing is, to be a sceptic (ie a scientist) you do need an understanding of the science. To be a believer and simple (in all senses of the word) follower of dogma, you do not. In fact your cult leaders actively discourage thinking for yourself, or asking questions. It's also strange that many of the high priests that preach the doctrine of the faith do not have any science education. So as an example, the entirety of the Bbc's 'climate' team. Or very often the people in their 'Verify' division. And then of course there's dear'ol Greta.. Rose to fame by skipping school and abandoning her education, and now seems to have switched activist tracks to that other lefty darling, Palestine.

Then again, you also appear to think that correlation is causation.

Sometimes. But that's just the way science is supposed to work. Notice a correlation, like temperature & CO2. Then set out to try and determine if correlation = causation, or not. Thus far, there's plenty of evidence that an increase in temperatures leads to an increase in CO2. Ice cores appear to support this, basic biology and ecology supports it. But there are still some who insist the reverse is true, and effect precedes cause. And they'll deny any evidence to the contrary, along with refusing the concept of a null hypothesis. This isn't really science, but it's been awesome for making money from the gullible.

And then there's whales. An interesting article on that here-

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scotttravers/2024/04/27/what-everyone-gets-wrong-about-the-offshore-windwhale-death-connection/

which even quotes from NOAA saying they don't know. And maybe they don't really want to know. Yet we do think man-made noise disturbs whales and other ocean life, ie the sonar in use for surveying might be restricted to ocean-friendly frequencies. But then there's other sources of noise, like pile driving, or just noise transmitted from spinning machinery into the ocean and seabed. You, of course jump straight into denial mode..

Something like the horrid vehicles in Gene Roddenberry's Planet Earth? Did they burn wood or coal??

Something like the horrid vehicles in Gene Roddenberry's Planet Earth? Did they burn wood or coal??

It's fine. A lot of US EVs are already coal-powered, only indirectly. Can't remember which climate supercomputer it was, either NOAA or NASA that moved to a coal state for cheap, reliable energy as well.

What's your take on China with them having world's largest installation of solar AND wind power? Or are they in the wrong side of curtain?

And the worlds largest fleet of coal power stations! I'm not sure I believe any numbers from the CCP.

Today, unless the data is stored on immutable storage it has zero authenticity.

China also has the most coal-powered power plants. It has the most of a lot of things, because it's a vast country with a huge demand for energy.

Dear God,

Please please can you stop Trump talking or if that is difficult please ensure Trump thinks *before* he talks !!!

I would mention something about Truth *but* that is a horse that has long bolted for Trump and I am not sure even you can 'fix' that particular problem !!!

Thanks in advance,

Anon C.

:)

please ensure Trump thinks *before* he talks !!!

That presupposes he has anything above the waist to think with.

More significantly than having the greatest number of coal power plants (which could be attributed to history and inertia) is that the CCP have continued to add hundreds of gigawatts of new coal power plants every year, and show no signs of slowing up.

"that the CCP have continued to add hundreds of gigawatts of new coal power plants every year, and show no signs of slowing up."

They are also hoovering up more and more of the manufacturing sector from all over the world, so some of their expansion isn't additive, but is power being moved from somewhere such as the US to China so they can produce cheap plastic doodads to feed the disposable economy. In order to feed their manufacturing growth as fast as possible, it's easiest to throw up a coal power plant. Even in a country with little to no red tape for building a nuclear plant, they still take lots of time to do properly. China is also working on more advanced nuclear power generation so as that can be connected up, they can delete or idle a dirty and expensive coal plant. It's not like they don't realize that burning coal is having a negative impact on their local environment and population.

Wind power is a profitable industry, even if subsidies were dropped tomorrow. Red state Montana is doing great with it. The benefits are spread evenly across all power consumers.

On the other hand, even with subsidies, EV sales have plummeted. The tax credits overwhelmingly advantaged those who needed it the least. CA law is still planning to force car makers to sell an percentage of EV's - hybrids won't count as EV. That's going to get very ugly and - rightfully - unpopular. Tesla (among other companies) moved HQ from CA to TX, where there are no state EV subsidies.

This "similarity" only exists in the well worn logic of political dogma, which is trailing reality by a huge gap. If Trump wins, it's not because of his ultra loyal base, it because of the Democratic party wallowing in political dogma and overlooking needs and interests of swing voters because it's easier to stick with the dogma and cajoling the MAGA hats.

One thing the CA legislature got right is passing SB9 in 2021 - that should allow home owners to split their lots into up to 4 family homes. If it weren't for the fact that judges and cities have gutted the intent of that law (thanks, Demistocrats), it would enable many more families to live closer to their work, thus enabling them to drive less - or even not at all and take public transportation instead.

With the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, trade war with China, rise of AI etc. - Trumps first priority would be reducing electricity generation capacity?

No comment.

That wasn't at a "rally", rather it was at a dinner at Mar.a.lago where Trump hosted around 20 fossil fuel executives and billionaire lobbyists. Not just getting rid of offshore windmills, he also promised them that he'd get rid of most other environment regulations, including an outright ban on electric cars, open up unlimited imports of LNG, and, of course, being billionaires, he'd also cut all their taxes ... if they gave him one billion dollars.

Selling political favo(u)rs, with a delicious hint of extortion. Out in the open. Lovely.

If I were to try that, I'd be hauled off to jail immediately. Two-tiered justice system indeed ... one for Teflon Don II, and one for the rest of us.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/09/climate/trump-oil-gas-mar-a-lago.html

See he's fighting corruption.

None of these shady backroom deals, he just put the legislation on eBay for open bids.

If you want tighter environmental regulations you just have to offer more than the il companies.