More stupidity from Dana Nessel

[Rate This]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other radical leftist AG's. Strength in numbers.

FIFY

Radical leftist as a term is overplayed. It’s like saying they are members of team Easter bunny.

Maybe.

But it's still an accurate term.

No it’s not. It’s an umbrella term for anybody a Republican disagrees with. Even if 20 years ago they were dead friggin center.

[teetoppz28]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other radical leftist AG's. Strength in numbers.

FIFY

Radical leftist as a term is overplayed. It’s like saying they are members of team Easter bunny.

Maybe.

But it's still an accurate term.

No it’s not. It’s an umbrella term for anybody a Republican disagrees with. Even if 20 years ago they were dead friggin center.

Also: RINO, if they have an "R" next to their name...

[Graham Wellington]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

[TC Talks]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

[Graham Wellington]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

Agreed, and I'm on board with continuing to move away from it (complete obsolescence is a pipe dream). Dana Nessel suing oil companies isn't the catalyst to accomplish this. What she is doing is nothing more than wasting taxpayer money for a political stunt.

[km1125]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

Are you advocating for the same standards of living and life expectancies from 200 years ago?

[Rate This]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

Are you advocating for the same standards of living and life expectancies from 200 years ago?

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

[TC Talks]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

Are you advocating for the same standards of living and life expectancies from 200 years ago?

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

Did you happen to see this? I watched the video, it was awkward.

Van Hool double-decker electric bus with Proterra battery drives 2,500 miles from Florida to California on public chargers

https://electrek.co/2022/03/11/van-hool ... -chargers/

[Rate This]

The suits state attorneys general filed against 3M, et al. for PFAS made sense. Harm in precise physical locations could be directly attributed to the substance.

I am unsure how one can prove what portion of climate change can be directly attributed to burning of fossil fuels. I am also unsure how economic damages associated with fossil fuel usage can be determined. Lastly, our economic vitality and standard of living is highly dependent on fossil fuel availability and usage.

Calling it a waste of money isn’t very accurate… if it succeeds the state would receive a big windfall on behalf of the citizens of Michigan. It could turn out to be quite lucrative indeed.

We're talking Dana Nessel here. Look at her track record. You really think she stands a remote chance of succeeding here? Just the premise of the lawsuit along screams long, drawn out, and expensive with no clear means of success.

Do you really think they would go on a wild goose chase to make a statement? There’s no upside to losing it.

She also is joining many other AG's. Strength in numbers.

That is her only hope - that a competent AG is involved that she can ride the coattails of. Something tells me the other AGs are nothing more than political activists as well.

Or this is a good move for the betterment of society and you disagree.

Do you support the cigarette lawsuit or the Oxy lawsuit?

Moving away from fossil fuels? Sure, if done logically. Suing fossil fuel providers for providing a product that society currently depends on for pretty much every aspect of life? How do you sue someone for providing a product that is currently essential?

Cigarettes and Oxy aren't essential life items. Apples to oranges comparison.

Gas and Oil can be made obsolete too. The world has only relied on it for less than 200 years.

Are you advocating for the same standards of living and life expectancies from 200 years ago?

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

Did you happen to see this? I watched the video, it was awkward.

Van Hool double-decker electric bus with Proterra battery drives 2,500 miles from Florida to California on public chargers

https://electrek.co/2022/03/11/van-hool ... -chargers/

They also loaned one of those to a YouTuber who runs a bus company… they went the opposite way from California to Florida… it didn’t go well and it was mostly related to the charging and low range of an electric bus. Most of the ones that have been tested barely get to 200 miles. There is some truth to the idea that the current crop of diesel engines is pretty damn clean… 90 some percent water vapor is all that comes out at the tailpipe. They capture all of the emissions in the DPF. It’s pretty neat stuff.

[km1125]

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

If we all believed that "peak oil" BS in the 70's we'd have been out of oil and gas a couple decades ago!

[TC Talks]

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

If we all believed that "peak oil" BS in the 70's we'd have been out of oil and gas a couple decades ago!

Rate This doesn't have the Petroleum Tin Foil Hat. Oil consumption is out pacing those 1970's peak oil projections.

[km1125]

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

If we all believed that "peak oil" BS in the 70's we'd have been out of oil and gas a couple decades ago!

Rate This doesn't have the Petroleum Tin Foil Hat. Oil consumption is out pacing those 1970's peak oil projections.

So is supply. By a long shot!

[Matt]

Does Dana's Subaru use gas?

[Rate This]

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

If we all believed that "peak oil" BS in the 70's we'd have been out of oil and gas a couple decades ago!

What do you think Fracking is? It is getting the oil out of increasingly difficult locations using new methods. That’s an indication we are slowly using it up. It IS a finite resource not something that gets created continuously forever. The stuff takes millions of years to make.

[TC Talks]

It’s a finite resource. We WILL RUN OUT in the next 100 years or so. Obsolescence will happen whether you approve or not.

If we all believed that "peak oil" BS in the 70's we'd have been out of oil and gas a couple decades ago!

What do you think Fracking is? It is getting the oil out of increasingly difficult locations using new methods. That’s an indication we are slowly using it up. It IS a finite resource not something that gets created continuously forever. The stuff takes millions of years to make.

I guess including everything else, he's an expert on oil.
Experts feel we are close to peak oil consumption. Researchers generally agree that oil can continue to be sought, but as the extraction cost rises (like with fracking) consumers will shift to cheaper ways to lower their lives. Here's an example:

Global electric vehicle sales (including hybrids) have increased by around sixfold in the past five years – and the IEA expects yet more sales in future years (Source: IEA 2023)

Another example is the lowering cost of solar powering your home.