If we want zero emissions, it’s going to mean no fossil fuels. Every new hookup means decades of burning fossil gas.
Not hooking up new buildings is one step along the way; a full retrofit of existing buildings and decommissioning of the gas pipeline network, like Ithaca is already doing, is necessary as well.
Problem is that a big chunk of new vehicle buyers never run their old cars into the ground like that; they treat ‘new car every few years’ as a status symbol. And a big chunk of vehicle buyers can only ever afford used cars. So it’s important that new vehicles all be electric, and not just some random subset.
That’s a really close thing. I recommend spending some time canvassing in a swing district near you if you’re able.
Prices have been dropping for years, and continue to do so. It’ll happen.
Getting real money for those means getting Congress on board to appropriate it.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that was true in some states. Look up the rules where you are.
No. A lot of those uses aren’t particularly dangerous unless you start doing things like drilling holes in it or otherwise producing dust. If it needs to be replaced, you’re on the hook for hiring somebody to remove it safely. Its use in new construction has been banned for decades.
This is just a ban on the last few uses of it.
The US government is designed to split power across multiple individials and institutions. So no, he can’t just do some things. And changing the tax code is one of them.
His power has been limited because people who fully share his views are a minority of the Senate and of the Democratic Party primary voters. You want something like what he wants? Then you need to organize to elect people who are willing to do it.
He was. He changed registration to run for President a few years back, and caucuses with the Democrats.
Who wins a primary is up to the voters.
Examples include Sen. Sanders. It’s not hard.
The Democrats don’t work in perfect lockstep; they’re a coalition, and as such, you often see pieces of the coalition who disagree with each other.
The Republican party tends to operate as a patronage machine, where they all go along with what the patrons dictate.
That’s why I talk about electing both more and better. They don’t have to be Manchins; you can see this at the state level with the kinds of policy changes you get in places like Michigan when Democrats start to hold a supermajority.
There are very real differences between the parties, on a pretty wide variety of issues. Who is elected has consequences in terms of policy that we have to live with.
That’s a very big deal.
Not always — when there are more and better Democrats we can actually change policy on this.
He did kill it — something like 48/50 Senate Democrats wanted to keep it, and every Republican wanted to get rid of it. That’s a reason to elect more and better Democrats, not to reject them entirely.
An attack on the midstream is fundamentally different from burning oil at the well in terms of how it affects how much carbon goes into the atmosphere; it results in oil not being extracted and burned.
We don’t always get that - that’s how we got a child tax credit for a few years. It’s that enough Americans have been stampeded into “hate the other person, they have darker skin, a different religion, etc” that we don’t elect people who do want to benefit the general public instead of billionaires. Change how we vote, and policy can and will change to match.
The survey compared those who watch Fox with those who watch neutral outlets like CNN. Those getting news from Fox were 100% planning to vote for Trump. Those watching neutral outlets had a minority who would not.
Changing media diet makes a really big difference