re: A Deleware judge voids Elon Musk’s $56 billion Tesla compensation

quote:

---

I would make note that this point is accurate IF you consider 60% to be almost 100%.

---

Not sure where you live.

Near me (few counties over) is a massive coal fired plant that produces near 100% of the electricity in folks home in this area. When you plug something in your wall here, it is coal that made it happen.

Since Greek times the steam engine has powered most all power

Nuclear heats water to make steam to turn a turbine
Gas heats water to make steam to turn a turbine
Oil heats water to make steam to turn a turbine
Coal heats water to make steam to turn a turbine

Passive solar is NOT active solar. A true solar furnace (again heats water to make steam) is only maybe 5 spots in the entire USA and they are hot, remote, rainless points west of the Mississippi River.

Water actually turns the turbine (so no need to make steam) but you are limited to access (like aging and needs to be replaced TVA or Hoover Dam)

Wind is limited in location and has still light years to go in gaining a higher % of actual civilization use.

If the alternative fuels initiatives started in the 70's had not been killed by the POTUS and Congress in the 1980's we would be about 1/2 century ahead in R&D by now, but we are not.

quote:

---

Crazy that a judge can void what a BoD has decided.

---

Hopefully Elon develops AI arbitrator judges and includes agreement to use them in every contract going forward.

quote:

---

Not sure how he will make ends meet until this gets resolved

---

I can think of worse things than giving Elon 56 billion to put into new projects. He's got a proven track record of funding innovative ideas.

quote:

---

Says you!


Horses were eco friendly and fuel efficient, women were not allowed to drive (no vote)

Autos are not eco friendly and ushered in women's suffrage and the vote

---

I'm pretty sure this is tongue in cheek. If so, well played. If not, those comments are still hilarious and I have no response.

quote:

---

#1 All electric are fine for short distance daily drive (recharge overnight)

#2 All electric are fine for 2 seat runabouts. If you want a SUV it can not be all electric as you can not alter the rules of physics. The bigger the vehicle, the bigger the battery to run it HAS to be.

#3 The special metals needed to actually build EV's all exist outside the US borders and the known total global supply would only allow building about 1% of the needed vehicles for global demand

#4 The "plug" that actually puts the electricity in the EV is still almost 100% fossil fuels (oil, nat gas, coal) so until you flip that, EV's for the masses are not gonna happen in your lifetime.

---

All of this is obviously true.

If we're eventually going to replace all gas-powered vehicles with EV, the amount of lithium mining that will have to occur will far surpass any supposed "gain" from moving away from gas-powered vehicles, and that's if we assume none of those EVs ever need to be replaced.

quote:

---

I’ve seen him discuss global warming, and he does not believe in the idea that man made global warming is a problem. He says the science is immature and inconclusive. He says that on balance he thinks it’s an experiment that is not worth running, so we probably should move away from fossil fuels just in case.

---

This is a straight up lie.

quote:

---

Am departing presidential councils. Climate change is real. Leaving Paris is not good for America or the world

---

quote:

---

How do we accelerate this transition away from fossil fuels to a sustainable era and what happens if we don't? If we wait and if we delay the change, the best case is simply delaying that inevitable transition to sustainable energy. This is the best case if we don't take action now. At the risk of being repetitive, there's going to be no choice in the long term to move to sustainable energy. It's tautological. We have to have sustainable energy or we'll simply run out of the other one. The only thing we gain by slowing down the transition is just slowing it down. It doesn't make it not occur. It just slows it down. The worst case however is more displacement and destruction than all the wars in history combined. These are the best/worst case scenarios. Then we have about 3% of scientists that believe in the best case. About 97% that believe in the worst case. This why I call it the dumbest experiment in history ever. Why would you do this?

---

quote:

---

We need to go from having untaxed negative externality, which is effectively a hidden carbon subsidy of enormous size, $5.3 trillion a year according to the IMF every year. We need to move away from this and have a carbon tax. This is being fought quite hard by the carbon producers. They're using tactics that are very similar to what the cigarette industry or the tobacco industry used for many years. They would take the approach of even though the overwhelming signs of the consensus was that smoking cigarettes was bad for you, they would find a few scientists that would disagree and then they would say, "Look, scientists disagree." That's essentially how they would try to trick the public into thinking that smoking is not that bad. The solution obviously is to remove the subsidy. That means we need to have a carbon tax and to make it something which is neither a left nor a right issue. We should make it probably a revenue neutral carbon tax. This would be a case of increasing taxes on carbon, but then reducing taxes in other places. Maybe there would be a reduction in sales tax or VAT and an increase in carbon tax so that only those using high levels of carbon would pay an increased tax.

---

quote:

---

I would say whenever you have the opportunity, talk to the politicians. Ask them to enact a carbon tax. We have to fix the unpriced externality. I would talk to your friends about it and fight the propaganda from the carbon industry.

---

quote:

---

Climate change is the biggest threat that humanity faces this century, except for AI,” he continues. “I keep telling people this. I hate to be Cassandra here, but it’s all fun and games until somebody loses a fricking eye. This view [of climate change] is shared by almost everyone who’s not crazy in the scientific community. “The fundamental intention of Tesla, at least my motivation,” Musk explains in his halting, stuttering voice, “was to accelerate the advent of sustainable energy. That’s why I open-sourced the patents. It’s the only way to transition to sustainable energy better.

---

Yep. Hardly a climate change activist

People on this board will tell you the left used to view elon as their hero.



But then they will also say that core reason the left loved him is a figment of their imagination and that he isn’t/was never a climate change advocate.

If he thought climate change wasn’t one of the biggest problems we faced as a species, why did the left love him so much?

Holy judicial overreach

quote:

---

Because he made EVs mainstream and the left views EVs as one of the fixes to climate change. Therefore he must be good.

---

So are we just going to ignore the multitude of speeches, q&a sessions, tweets and interviews where he states unequivocally that climate change as a result of carbon release by humans is a top 2 problem that we face as a planet?




It’s crazy convenient how anyone who advocates for climate change issues is stupid, crazy or evil except for musk, who could only be doing it for personal profit and doesn’t actually believe any of it.

quote:

---

I'm pretty sure this is tongue in cheek. If so, well played. If not, those comments are still hilarious and I have no response.

---

A sense of humor has gotten me this far, sadly we are going down the scale loaded with d*ck and fart jokes that (while needed at time) lower our collective IQ. If I had posted something funny on the Poli Board (Like my current Muppets one) it is greeted with a rash of downvotes by folks who really need to get a life.

quote:

---

that's if we assume none of those EVs ever need to be replaced.

---

OMG, rational thinking and problem solving on the internet!

How does that happen!