Source: Official account
You must log in or register to comment.
- michaelalf@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Holy third World country Batman! This administration is fucking insane.
- Veserr@sh.itjust.worksEnglish2 months
I don’t think he is insane at all. He went to MIT. He owns an oil company.
In 2011, he founded Liberty Energy, then known as Liberty Oilfield Services. As of February 2023, the company was valued at $2.8 billion, according to The Wall Street Journal. As the CEO of Liberty Energy, Wright earned $5.6 million in 2023.
In 2019 Wright drank fracking fluid to demonstrate that it was not dangerous. In a video posted to LinkedIn in January 2023, he said, “There is no climate crisis and we’re not in the midst of an energy transition either”.
On November 16, 2024, President-elect Donald Trump announced his nomination of Wright to serve as U.S. secretary of energy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Wright#cite_note-LibertyLeadership-14
The insane people are the ones who voted for this.
- [deleted]@piefed.worldEnglish2 months
If he was sane he would pivot his company to renewables. Companies change what they do all the time.
- ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish2 months
Competing with China is too much work. Easier to game the system than it is to change a business.
- foggenbooty@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Exactly. One of the big mistakes the average person makes is assuming aligned interest. When they make a move that we consider “insane” it’s because we’re focused on different outcomes.
Why are you doubling down on an energy sector that is more expensive, in decline, and causes pollution? You’d be insane not to pivot to renewables!
But… oil is subsidised, and they don’t care about pollution or oil decline because those are too far out. They can make money right now, more of it than they will ever need. So they do.
- Pringles@sopuli.xyzEnglish2 months
While I understand this sentiment and do agree that we should have a high sense of climate urgency, oil companies aren’t going anywhere anytime soon. A big first step is simply to stop burning oil, but even if we do that we will still require a huge amount of it. All plastics, ALL of them, are oil derivatives.
Look around you, wherever you are, and you will see things that are made with plastics. And if they aren’t made out of oil derivatives, they are made by oil derivatives either as a source of energy, or the machinery to make it has plastics. The clothes you are wearing, your shoes, your hair comb, your toaster, car, glasses, pc, t-shirt, birding binoculars, camping tent, the list is never ending because it’s everyfuckingwhere. The prints on your glass, the pen with which you write or the keyboard you type on, it is so incredibly pervasive.
So we can rant at these oil companies, but an enormous chunk of the economy depends on it and that’s a simple fact. I’m not claiming to have the answers, but we can’t just get rid of oil, which is why I say that step 1 is to simply stop burning it. That will already stop the worst, the bleeding if you will.
And sure, renewables are good and to have renewable energy is infinitely better than burning oil, but they only solve the most obvious problem. The real issue is what would we use instead of plastics? And as far as I know, there is no alternative.
2 monthsMaybe being unable to feel empathy and only caring about being powerful and pleasing those in power can be considered as insanity?
- Mantzy81@aussie.zoneEnglish2 months
Don’t be rude. “Third World” countries aren’t this idiotic and know that renewable energy is the cheapest form of electrical energy, and the easiest to implement, that there is.
- Mirshe@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
I was about to say, all those third world countries in Africa and South America are looking to do wind, solar, etc because it’s cheap and independent, rather than relying on coal or gas from other nations.
- crandlecan@mander.xyzEnglish2 months
Yep. It’s time people start remembering that those # World groupings were geographical in nature, not economical.
It was about support during the Cold War.
““Third world” is an outdated and often pejorative Cold War-era term originally used to describe countries not aligned with the US (First World) or the Soviet Union (Second World).”
- Wrufieotnak@feddit.orgEnglish2 months
Close but wrong, it was the alignment during the cold war:
- First World: USA & allies
- Second World: USSR & allies
- Third World: non-aligned
Quoting J-Live, “World’s Apart”
Verse 2
They say the old world brought up a new world order
And ran up in the third world and divvied up borders
Tribes were divided by countries that were thought up
Economically held back and never caught up
Power corrupts and the oppressed get slaughtered
Mothers and fathers’ll lose sons and daughters
Brothers and sisters denied human rights
And can’t even guarentee themselves clean drinking water
First world speaker, second world spoken to
Third world who they conversatin’ about
Hardly even got a voice in the conversation
So the words fall on deaf ears and get drowned out
But uh, speaking as the first person, I can’t take it
Speaking to the second person, you on some snake shit
Speaking for the third person, they ain’t gon’ make it
But who are we to talk 'cause it’s really our fault
They say the opposite of love is not hate, it’s apathy
So lack of self-love ain’t self-hate, it’s apathy
We so desensitized by travesty and tragedy
How we supposed to realize humanity’s majesty
Accessed via Genius.com
Yes, and decimate use to mean to destroy one tenth of something.
Definitions change from their original usage.
- 2 months
They’re ideological, a hangover from the cold war.
The first world: The US, plus its allies in NATO which were mostly in Western Europe.
The second world: Russia and the USSR, plus its sphere of influence through the Warsaw pact.
The third world: Literally everyone else.
So for example the underdeveloped backwards hellholes of… er, Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland were all non-aligned and thus technically “third world” nations.
- crandlecan@mander.xyzEnglish2 months
Fair enough. My point mostly was that for most (older) Western Europeans 3rd world is a synonym for an economic hellhole. Like, Switzerland. Fracking socialists 😤 Wait, that sounds… Wrong…? No? Anyways, it’s not just ‘poor Africans’.
- 4am@lemmy.zipEnglish2 months
“Don’t worry Jeffery…I’ll show them. I’ll destroy their precious America for what they made me do to you…”
- 2 months
“Low value energy” because “the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow.”
Oil, on the other hand, famously requires no effort whatsoever to locate, extract and refine before use. The wells are just spewing out oil constantly, for free, for eternity. We never have to transport it. Oil just spawns nearby population hubs as
AllahyahwehJESUS wills it. There’s no way a hostile country could close a relatively small waterway and make that a lot less convenient. And no, oil will not run out eventually. It’s eternal. Omg what a cuck who cares about climate change? CO2 is just plant food. Did you fail high school science?Thank you. I’m thrilled to be destroying the climate (and getting rich) on this blessed day of independence
- 2 months
Funnily enough, oil is just solar energy stored in molecules.
- Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish2 months
If only it were possible to stockpile energy against any future need.
- blarth@thelemmy.clubEnglish2 months
The wind isn’t blowing and the sun isn’t shining. It’s absolute hell!
- 2 months
Just imagine! We would be so stuck. It would require some kind of hydrocarbon-based fuel to be held in storage just in case. Or we could try to split the atom. But that’s pure madness. It’d never work
- axh@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
They know. They just don’t care. North Korea might be a poor shithole but Kim is an Emperor for life, and can do whatever he wants. I would guess that’s what Donny aims for.
- Serinus@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Don. Kim is largely a product of circumstance.
Don is doing this because he’s fucking stupid.
- Zombie@feddit.ukEnglish2 months
Is that supposed to be a good or bad thing? Particularly taking into account your username.
- Zombie@feddit.ukEnglish2 months
Is that supposed to be a good or bad thing? Particularly taking into account your username.
- fizzle@quokk.auEnglish2 months
Indeed.
In fairness the USA has been fairly methodical about regressing in this way, not like this one thing had totally fucked them.
- OctopusNemeses@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
The problem will go away if they post enough “china bad” on social media.
- el_twitto@lemmy.zipEnglish2 months
Fuck those stupid fucking motherfuckers. Fuck, I hate what these ignorant fuckwits have done to my country. I hope they all get cancer and die soon.
Considering that theyre doing this to prop up oil and coal, they might. I mean, we all might too.
- manxu@piefed.socialEnglish2 months
Silly you: no more wind farms means no more cancer! The Prez said so! /s
I mean, there are a bunch of people who are involved in the oil and gas (and coal, but those guys are are a corpse) industry who are terrified of things going away. If coal goes, so does, say, Gillette, Wyoming. That’s part of where Trump got support from.
But it’s not gonna change the general trajectory all that much on carbon. They might kick the can down the road a little more, but it’s gonna die sooner or later.
“I’m thrilled to report that after 35 years, on July 4th, we will take the future of our grandchildren out into the backyard and shoot it into the head until it dies on the altar of fossil fuel profits.”
- npcknapsack@lemmy.caEnglish2 months
Oh, no, they wouldn’t do that. That’s murder! No, no, they shoot the grandkids in the legs and arms, then complain they’re lazy and entitled and say nothing was done to them. Bring your popcorn, and if you’re feeling generous, you can smother it in crude and offer it to the grandkids.
- Log in | Sign up@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
US Energy Secretary: “I’m thrilled to report that tomorrow morning, on July 4th, we will end subsidies for wind and solar projects”
Celebrating America’s independence from rational thought, America’s independence from cheap energy sources, and America’s independence from looking after our children and grandchildren.
- Log in | Sign up@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
The Onion has got me so regularly because Republicans are so willing to do crazy shit that’s obviously a Very Bad Idea Indeed and completely bonkers, just to “own the libs” that the Onion can write batshit crazy nonsense and not sound any different from trump.
- vortic@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Why does everything that comes from this administration have to be the worst possible decision for any given situation? They’re so dumb, you’d think they’d stumble into a good thing every once in a while.
Fuck these malicious assholes!
A stupid person flailing around with their decisions will end up making a number of good decisions by sheer statistical probability.
America hasn’t made one good decision, not even by accident. So the only conclusion I can draw is America is incredibly malicious and has become hostile to all things good.
- Armok_the_bunny@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
That’s not entirely true, they stopped minting pennies pretty early on.
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
So the only conclusion I can draw is America is incredibly malicious and has become hostile to all things good.
Yeah, only not “has become”, but “always was”. It was just more convenient marketing to pretend otherwise.
Because there’s big money in doing the worst possible decision and the American voters are more or less fine with money in politics.
- 2 months
There are things the majority of Americans want and have no option to vote for. Have wanted for years.
I don’t like Americans.
I do not think Americans would make good or compassionate decisions.
But the american people simply are not in control here. The entire electoral system is built to keep them away from power.
- monotremata@lemmy.caEnglish2 months
They do very occasionally blunder into something that has merits. Like, they rescheduled marijuana, and they’re fast-tracking research on therapeutic psilocybin and MDMA. Those are positive things, broadly speaking. Removing the tax on tipped workers was also helpful for some working-class people.
I can’t think of anything else off the top of my head, but part of that is probably availability bias: the vaguely positive stuff that they do is a lot less emotionally charged, and therefore less memorable, than the wildly awful stuff they also constantly do.
- AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Removing the tax on tipped workers was also helpful for some working-class people.
I’m much more cynical about this. Tipping has always been the most acceptable kind of tax fraud, that we all willingly participate in. I’m sure it’s changing as credit cards dominate, but tips paid in cash leave no record trail, no evidence that they ever existed. Why would wait staff be diligent about reporting it? At the same time, it’s small potatoes to the IRS, hardly worth trying to enforce. Why even bother?
- uberfreeza@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
I also dont like it in general. mainly because as an ex-server i know most dont report at least a percentage of cash tips. and i assume the worst when it comes to businesses who will keep wages lower to advertise tips that are no longer taxed (up to a certain amount).
- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Like, they rescheduled marijuana
As someone in the cannabis industry, that is very unlikely to be a positive thing for anyone except rich dicks who own MSO’s.
For reference, cannabis legalization in California was, by and large, terrible for the average consumer. You have people sucking on heavy-metal laden commodified cannabis (vape carts) for the first time on a large scale as a result of it, prices are generally higher, and quality is universally lower.
- AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
they rescheduled marijuana
Half-assed it. How do you schedule the drug differently when it’s “medical” vs recreational? I don’t partake so it doesn’t affect me either way, but a lot of people like it for anxiety and to help calm the mind to sleep.
How is it that a person in Massachusetts trying to calm their anxiety is using “drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.”, but a person in Florida using it exactly the same is using “ as drugs with a moderate to low potential for physical and psychological dependence.”?
- BradleyUffner@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
It’s nothing new. There’s always be the good old
“this chemical is known to the state of California to pose a cancer risk” as an example.- 7101334@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
That’s a state warning. It makes sense for it to be state-specific. It does not make sense for federal policy to be state-specific (though it long has been for cannabis anyway, that’s true).
- Avicenna@programming.devEnglish2 months
worst possible decision stated in the worst possible trump cock sucking way possible
- Furbag@pawb.socialEnglish2 months
They do, every once in a rare while, actually make a really bold but good decision. It’s always framed as “we’re doing [insert good thing] to own the libs!” And them they get all surprised when we’re not angry about it. And then they quietly yank the bill or get Trump or some republican governor to veto it or something so they aren’t embarrassed thay they actually passed bipartisan popular legislation.
- 2 months
Ironically, it’s fossil fuels that need subsidies now… unless solar cells are subjected to tariffs.
- Natanael@slrpnk.netEnglish2 months
Fossil always needed subsidies. The energy taxes on fuel are not enough to cover the externalities and also the list price still doesn’t even cover the infrastructure costs
- njordomir@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Yep, if they actually had to clean up their messes a lot of things would have reflected their true costs and we probably would have built out the alternatives way further by now. Imagine if the motorcar had barely existed and we skipped straight to PEVs (personal electric vehicles) and distributed solar battery charging cafes.
- realitista@lemmus.orgEnglish2 months
Why do they need them? Why not price them according to their actual cost and let them compete on the free and open market against other energy sources?
Wait, so you’re telling me that we, that taxpayers, have paid to build out the fossil fuel infrastructure, and these companies which get to spend our money then turn around and charge us for the products of our investments???
- nightwatch_admin@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
The IMF has kept an account of fossil fuel subsidies over the years. Explicit amount in 2024: .73b usd, 0.6% of global gdp. Implicit 6.7 trillion, 5.8% of global gdp.
- valgarf@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish2 months
That is an amazing little speech. I think except for the first sentence and the “Thank you” at the end every sentence contained misinformation on renewables. I wonder how long it took them to come up with this density of lies.
Didn’t you hear? It’s now easier than ever to create large swaths of slop thanks to AI! It probably took ~1 minute. /s
Unfortunately, the sun and wind have no money to “donate” to our political parties, and the oil companies have many billions of dollars, so sun and wind is out on its ass.
That one has less than 1k subscribers. This one has over 45k. I’m all for posting in the right community, but I also like the visibility.
