deepest-sleeper.bsky.social
mostly just observing. climate change, news, energy topics.
145 posts
60 followers
297 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
missed this, sorry. thanks!
comment in response to
post
Dr.Jenkins, I have seen that, even with a total IRA rollback etc., modelling studies seem to indicate that US emissions will still gently decline. Do you think that's true or, with greater demand from AI, will the trend in declining US emissions go into reverse? Obviously you can't know for sure...
comment in response to
post
No worries if you don't feel like explaining. I would look forward to a blog/substack some day. It has been a long time since an academic paper got the other place buzzing to this degree. Glad we can be a little more relaxed here...
comment in response to
post
I am a layman but I am somewhat familiar with Samir Amin, etc., and did read the paper. Do you mind briefly explaining why you think it's nonsense? Do you disagree with Prebisch's work as well? I will check out that W. Arthur Lewis book. That looks great.
comment in response to
post
Zeroing out IRA subsidies and more aggressive diplomacy regarding LNG exports I guess?
comment in response to
post
see above: bsky.app/profile/robi...
unfortunately not true I guess?
comment in response to
post
EVs are the future for sure. But interesting that total car sales seem to be declining, with EVs taking up a higher share of a declining total? Interesting.
comment in response to
post
And the sea ice is at a record low level! earthobservatory.nasa.gov/world-of-cha...
Again, look at the long term records for Greenland and Antarctica.
Source: climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/...
comment in response to
post
trying to take the load off Dr.Hausfather, but climate science has plenty of ways to explain natural variations like this one: www.livescience.com/planet-earth...
Heavy snowfall is likely behind the rebound. Long term trend is still abrupt loss.
comment in response to
post
great article. I hope we are not surprised on the upside again.
comment in response to
post
Thanks Dr.Hausfather!
comment in response to
post
That sounds right to me but I assume a lot of uncertainty. @hausfath.bsky.social does this sound about right to you (if you don't mind me asking). Is the growth in the airborne fraction far outpacing model predictions at this time?
comment in response to
post
I am assuming the full IRA repeal from the house bill is going to pass. Not sure why dynamics in the senate are any different from the house. So I would guess that/high interest rates might negate a good number of these nice breaks?
comment in response to
post
fair!
comment in response to
post
feels a little like motivated reasoning to me, even though I wish it were true.
comment in response to
post
still, curious how you et al. could acknowledge the above fact (protecting "the environment" could mean anything from "degrowth" to "subsidize EVs" to "ban solar panels on farmland" to "outlaw chemtrails") with the statement that these results might spur "‘degrowth from below’" (from the abstract).
comment in response to
post
replied to you a moment ago with maybe too sarcastic of a tone. sorry about that, didn't realize it was your study and should have been nicer (should have been nicer even if it was not your study!).
comment in response to
post
it didn't help that the president, who was in charge of spreading this message, was too braindead to speak half the time.
comment in response to
post
importantly, China will have built an impenetrable tech lead by then...
comment in response to
post
Pretty sure they are mostly PHEVs though, not full EV, and Tesla still leads in full EV.
comment in response to
post
8. Full repeal of current federal energy and climate policies would: Kill off the nascent clean hydrogen, CO2 management, and nuclear power sectors.
🔌💡
comment in response to
post
I had this feeling. One time. When the IRA passed. 😅
comment in response to
post
I am hoping at least some of those IRA credit changes get softened by the Senate....
comment in response to
post
I think part of the problem is that there seems to be exactly zero political will to do much about the problem (in the West at least).
And if James Hansen is right and warming is going to accelerate mightily, we are kin of done anyway?
comment in response to
post
Yeah that all makes sense, I was confused for the same reason (but not an expert, so nice to see that you agree). Thanks!
comment in response to
post
Yeah I was curious about this one as well, especially because we are likely headed to at least 2-3C.
comment in response to
post
Hopefully the FEOC rules are not as crazy as they are in the rest of the draft...
comment in response to
post
Honestly, if 1.5 is not "safe," and we are getting high sea level rise no matter what, I am going to become a "focus on adaptation" guy primarily. I know this study hedges with "every degree" matters but we are heading to 2-3C.
comment in response to
post
is 45Q on the chopping block in these IRA negotiations?
comment in response to
post
Fair. I do not feel that the Trump administration is an honest player in these conversations so I am not expecting much (especially not in the house): www.politico.com/news/2025/05...
obviously you know more than I do.
comment in response to
post
is geothermal (and clean firm) totally undermined if we get the IRA tax credit repeals that are on the table?
comment in response to
post
Unless you disagree and think Biden was fine?
comment in response to
post
You might be right if this was just simple hippie-punching. But there was clearly a deep problem with Biden's capacity to do the job that the vast majority of Americans identified and resented.
comment in response to
post
have you considered the fact that the American people felt a deep betrayal watching their president melt down on camera, and watching the Democratic party pretend he was ok? have you considered that shivving Biden publicly might help them reclaim their credibility?