Testpilot
9 hours ago
Gary you posted:
“ While you're at it, look at the statistics on energy production, you'll find our production is the biggest in the world now, and we're producing the most energy we've ever produced. Look at the facts,”
Well I looked at the facts. Here’s why Biden produced more crude oil:
*Biden's Use of Strategic Petroleum Reserve*
President Biden has tapped the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to help increase crude oil production and bring down prices at the pump ¹. Here are some key points about his actions:
- *Largest-ever release from the SPR*: In March 2022, Biden authorized the release of 180 million barrels from the SPR, with 15 million barrels sold in December 2022 ¹.
- *Coordinated effort with allies*: The release was done in coordination with other countries, including China, India, South Korea, Japan, and the United Kingdom, which also released oil from their reserves ².
- *Goal of reducing prices*: The move aimed to reduce prices at the pump, which had risen due to the pandemic and geopolitical tensions ².
- *Replenishing the SPR*: The Biden administration has also announced plans to replenish the SPR when prices are low, to encourage more production and provide certainty to producers ¹.
Here's what else I found:
- *Trump did not tap the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR)*: During his presidency, the SPR actually declined by about 57 million barrels, from 695.1 million barrels to 638.1 million barrels ¹.
- *Claim of filling the reserve*: Trump claimed that he had filled the SPR to 100% capacity, but this was not accurate ².
- *Proposal to buy more oil*: In March 2020, Trump proposed buying an additional 77 million barrels of oil to add to the reserve, but Congress did not approve the funding ¹.
skitahoe
11 hours ago
Much of what you say is true, especially if you look at the statistics through 2019, but he was President through all of 2020 and if you look at the economy at the end of his term, he was a disaster with some of the biggest deficits in history. 2024 minus 4 doesn't equal 2019 as much as the Republican's would like to say it does, look at the figures at the end of 2020.
While you're at it, look at the statistics on energy production, you'll find our production is the biggest in the world now, and we're producing the most energy we've ever produced.
Look at the facts, not what Trump says, if you want to know if he's lying, watch his lips, if they move, he is.
Gary
skitahoe
11 hours ago
You may disagree, but I don't think you can prove any of my statements wrong.
As for Trump's business acumen, he went bankrupt several time, including Casino's. He ran a charity that was determined to be operating illegally. He fronted a University that was forced out of business and I believe had to refund to many students. He cheated all sorts of contractors out of what he said he'd pay. His tax returns are constantly under review as he attempts to pay nothing in spite of being a billionaire. He'd been sued by many, and lost many of the suits. He's still claiming he won the election in spite of all courts rejecting his claims, often by judges he appointed. How much more need I say to see that he's a bully who worships dictators, and would really like to be one.
Gary
Testpilot
13 hours ago
Some of the notable achievements of Trump’s first presidency include:
1. Tax cuts and reforms: Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, which lowered taxes for individuals and businesses and led to increased economic growth.
2. Deregulation: Trump signed several executive orders aimed at reducing regulations on businesses, particularly in the energy and financial sectors.
3. Supreme Court appointments: Trump nominated two conservative justices to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, both of whom have had significant impacts on the court's decisions.
4. Criminal justice reform: Trump signed the First Step Act in 2018, a bipartisan bill aimed at reforming the criminal justice system and reducing sentences for nonviolent drug offenders.
5. Economic growth: During Trump's presidency, the economy experienced a period of growth, with low unemployment rates and record-high stock market levels.
I have good reason to believe his second presidency will be even better.
Testpilot
14 hours ago
“ Look at all the people who worked for Trump who don't believe he should ever be President again. Look at all the Presidential Historians who rank him worst of all time. Look at science, this is a man who surrounds himself with people who'll say yes to him, he fires them when they tell him he's wrong. He's properly named DON, like in mafia Don, do what I say or your out. He's a bully, believes if you tell a lie often enough it becomes true, like he won the last election, and he's simply not suited to the office.”
In my opinion this statement is a subjective critique of Donald Trump's presidency and character, with little factual basis and some exaggerated or opinionated elements. Here's a breakdown:
- Factual elements:
- Some former Trump administration officials have publicly criticized him or distanced themselves from his actions.
- Many Presidential historians and political scientists have ranked Trump's presidency as one of the worst or poorest in U.S. history.
- Opinionated or exaggerated elements:
- The characterization of Trump as a "bully" and comparisons to a mafia Don are subjective and pejorative.
- The statement that Trump surrounds himself only with yes-men is an oversimplification, as some advisors have publicly disagreed with him or resigned over policy differences.
- The claim that Trump believes lies become true through repetition is a common criticism, but also a subjective interpretation of his behavior.
Overall, this statement is a critical opinion piece rather than a factual summary, and its tone and language reflect a strong anti-Trump perspective.
skitahoe
15 hours ago
I clearly differ from your opinion, Trump sees himself as all knowledgeable, he doesn't listen to experts, scientists, etc. He's the expert and if he says drill baby drill or burn baby burn, he's right regardless of what it does to the planet long term. The Chinese no doubt pollute, but they're working very hard to reduce it. Biden was trying to build industry that's green, and has added many jobs in trying to make the world better. Trump will undermine everything Biden tried to do for one, and only one reason, because Biden did it. It won't be based on what's right for the country or right for the world, that's just not the way Trump works.
Look at all the people who worked for Trump who don't believe he should ever be President again. Look at all the Presidential Historians who rank him worst of all time. Look at science, this is a man who surrounds himself with people who'll say yes to him, he fires them when they tell him he's wrong. He's properly named DON, like in mafia Don, do what I say or your out. He's a bully, believes if you tell a lie often enough it becomes true, like he won the last election, and he's simply not suited to the office.
If you really want to advance Coretec, it will go far further under an administration that supports Green Initiatives. I don't care if Musk supports Trump, he's thrived under Biden and his push for infrastructure improvement to support EV's and many other things of benefit to him. Biden provided far greater support for what Musk had in mind than Trump did while in office, but Musk often works against his best interests and doesn't care, as in what he did with Twitter, or in taking his businesses out of California because of his political stances. Musk is truly brilliant at developing new technology, but he should leave it at that and stay out of politics. Can you really support anyone who'd consider taking us out of NATO or surrendering the Ukraine to Russia.
Gary
Testpilot
1 day ago
The following points are true:
- Human activities, including pollution and industrialization, have harmed the environment and contributed to climate change.
- Polar ice caps and glaciers are melting at an alarming rate.
- Sewage and pollutants have been released into oceans for centuries.
- Modern sewage systems can effectively treat waste and produce useful products.
- Nutrient-poor surface waters in oceans can be fertilized through artificial upwelling.
The following points speculative:
- The exact timing and rate of ice shelf collapse and sea level rise are uncertain.
- The potential for "black pools" of biologically loaded matter to form crude oil-like substances is unclear.
- The feasibility and effectiveness of artificial upwelling on a large scale are still theoretical.
- Key takeaways:
- Human activities have harmed the environment, and urgent action is needed to mitigate climate change.
- Investing in sustainable solutions, like advanced sewage treatment and ocean fertilization, can have long-term benefits.
- Protecting and preserving natural ecosystems, like oceans, is crucial for supporting biodiversity and regulating the climate.
Juststoppingby
1 day ago
This does not mandate that car manufacturers make only EVs. They can also make gas engines, Hybrids, hydrogen cars, and other types of vehicles.
Nowhere in the 374-page EPA regulation does it mandate EVs only. The EPA wants to lower tailpipe emissions and raise miles per gallon, which would be the logical transition to making EVs at this point in time. Some cars today get 50-plus miles per gallon.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-18/pdf/2024-06214.pdf
President Biden's lofty goal of a 50% electric vehicle sales share by 2030 will most likely not happen. But then again, if Endurion battery technology works extremely well, it might be possible 😊.
"One notable group that got involved in lobbying for these regulations was Tesla. Tesla, Lucid and Rivian all filed briefs supporting "alternative 1," the strongest option which was actually stronger than the original proposal, while other automakers supported much more lax sets of regulations that would do more harm and save less money.
In the end, the regulations that were adopted are "technology-agnostic," which means that automakers can choose to meet these regulations using whatever engine technology they wish, as long as it's more fuel efficient and less polluting than what they've got today. There is no mandate on how automakers must meet them, and several proposed pathways to act as an example of how automakers might make it.
This includes more efficient gas engines, more hybrids, a large EV mix, use of hydrogen vehicles, smaller vehicles, and so on. At no point do the regulations mandate any technology, and they in fact explicitly point out that no one technology is mandated."
skitahoe
1 day ago
I won't argue that we don't have accurate records that go back that far. The polar ice caps however tell the story over centuries and the addition of man-made pollutants is clear from the beginning of the industrial revolution. For centuries we treated the earth like it was a giant trash can that we could throw anything into, and do no harm. The truth is we've killed off so many species and if we don't get things under control we could do it to ourselves. Don't be surprised if major polar or other ice shelves suddenly fall into the ocean and seawater rise occurs far faster than anyone anticipates.
Sewage untreated had been put in the ocean for centuries, and probably still is in some parts of the world. In some places a black pool has developed that's biologically loaded with deadly matter. This might eventually turn into something like crude oil, I don't know, but at one point on the East Coast the thinking was that in a big enough storm some of it could be brought ashore. They no longer add to what's there, but I have no idea how many similar places exist elsewhere. Modern sewar systems can virtually treat everything and turn nearly all of it into useful products, including drinkable water, but few places take it that far. Perhaps we'll pay more attention if fish kills intensify in the oceans.
I believe our oceans could be the answer to our pollution if we'd make them fertile. Most of the surface of the ocean is practically void of life because the nutrient rich water is 400 feet down and the surface is biologically void of life. Areas where the surface is rich with nutrients have natural upwelling that brings nutrient to the surface. Artificial upwelling shouldn't be that hard to do, but it's not yet been done. If we did it, the excess carbon dioxide could be handled by plankton, kelp, etc that could form near the surface, and fish population and other sea life would be supported as well as the plankton became food in an otherwise void part of the planet. It could also have the effect of cooling down the surface temperature of the ocean as cooler water from the deep would be brought up by the artificial upwelling units. Of course there is no quick benefit from such a plan, but long run, the world's a better place and seafood is more readily available.
Gary
skitahoe
2 days ago
Pegs, once again, I believe that ours, and others, technologies can eliminate all, or nearly all the problems by the time a large proportion of the cars are supposed to be electric. I'm certain that in 2030 some cars may only have 200 mile range, which is perfectly acceptable for people only looking forward to doing almost all their driving close to where they live. 99% of the time that would describe me, and I believe many others. However by 2030 I believe that anyone willing to pay a little more for it will be able to get EV's that go 500 miles or more between charges. At 70 mph that's still over 7 hours of driving time, no one should drive that long without at least a couple stops, but for most people, they'll be at their destination, so they can sleep, and fully recharge overnight.
My point is that it's clear that weather is changing, oceans are rising, we need to take the actions we can to slow the changes and clearly cars are one area where it's possible. We need to do far more than that.
I'm 81, just had a minor heart attack in the last week, would still like to live to the century mark, but I'll be fine with the changes here in LA, but I don't believe my daughters will. Changes are coming fast, I'd really not be surprised if in 20 to 40 years Marina del Rey, where I keep my boat, that either seawalls must be raised, or water will routinely lap over the walls at extreme high tides, with even a small surge at these times docks could be floated away from the pilings holding them in place. If it were up to me, nothing bigger than an outhouse could be built without solar. Costs of solar shingles, panels, etc would come down dramatically when they must be used. Every window in a property can be a solar collector, it would certainly be more expensive than just glass, but when mandated, and perhaps subsidized, it wouldn't be that much greater. Of course we could also build homes that were fireproof, would resist hurricane or tornado force winds, etc. It's more expensive to do so, but if mandated, it probably can be done with little added cost. The problem is, we fight to keep doing things the same way we always do.
People like Trump can afford to ignore todays problems, he's nearly as old as me, his golf courses, etc. won't be underwater if he lives to the century mark, the problem is the world he leaves behind. America is currently producing more energy than any time in the past, drill baby drill is just a way of using up our national resources more quickly, rather than allowing them to last longer while we're trying to keep the planet habitable longer. There is only so much energy available on the earth, why rush to burn it up, and add to the pollution that's accelerating climate change. We need to recognize the obvious, we're seeing record temperatures, more violent weather, etc. The more we deny it, the worse it becomes in the future. The EV is just a tiny part of the effort, far more needs to be done, but at least it's a start.
Gary
pegs1
2 days ago
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2024/04/07/biden-electric-vehicle-mandate-epa-rule-climate-change/73189241007/
Gary,
Don’t get me wrong, I think that EV’s are great. But there are many concerns including cost, electric grid, minerals,cold weather, infrastructure ,etc. until new technologies are available such as Silicon batteries,etc, these problems will remain……
skitahoe
2 days ago
Have you driven an EV for any period of time. I know many who have, and few ever use a public charger. The network should be improved, but the biggest change that eliminates the problem is vehicle range.
I frankly have been very satisfied with just 120 volt charging, I have often driven for days before plugging it in overnight. I will put in 220 volt when the equipment is available to make the car the backup system to my solar.
If the range is boosted, most people on the road can move from hotel to hotel and charge while they sleep. Worst case, one charging stop in a long day of driving. 20 minutes at a rest stop or restaurant would take you another 300 or more miles.
The problem is only big for those who don't try it, and it will only get better as new technology, like ours, makes far greater range available.
Gary
Quikshft
5 days ago
The longer this goes on for me, the greater the “us vs them” mentality becomes. Us = 20%, and them = 80%. Following the deal close, I find it ironic that we’re going to be looking to Endurion for the boost in stock price just as we have been for several years. Core Optics expects 8 million in sales this year, if Endurion is worth a crap what kind of sales would we expect out of it??? Considering the potential of the EV market and batteries in general, 8 million would be nothing. Yet Core Optics based on sales of 8 million is demanding 80% of the company following the close. It is a little hard to swallow, and they have a lot to prove to me. Are the Core Optics people going to make their money by building the company? Or are they just hungry to sell their stock? That the Lock-up Agreement seems to allow for some structured sales in as little as three months after the close, there is an appearance that stock selling is on the list. A lock-up of a couple years might have provided some confidence.
That said I find myself wondering about the need for Coretec to snap at a deal like this. Sure, they didn’t have to go out looking for another financer like Armistice or DAF, but if Endurion is on the brink of greatness how hard would it have been? Ready for this to close, but the amended share exchange agreement seems to suggest that they have some issues that need to be cleaned up….
News
Market Data
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
