Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (1127441)	3/28/2019 12:51:55 AM
From: mel221	1 Recommendation Recommended By James Seagrove Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574094

>> Did you see this line? "Carbon pollution dropped 13 percent statewide since a 2004 peak; meanwhile the economy grew 26 percent." Yes, and I know the smoke any mirrors utilized to create such numbers. California imports about a quarter of its electricity on average eia.gov California has been the national leader in the energy transition, and in many ways has even led the world – even if outpaced by smaller nations such as Denmark and Uruguay. However, critics have long pointed to the large amount of electricity imported by the state – nearly 1/3 of all power consumed – to allege that the state’s power is not as clean as claimed. pv-magazine-usa.com You should do a real analysis of California CO2 emissions. Start with the CO2 produced by a Prius built in Japan and imported into California. The CO2 emissions from the production of the Prius Dominates the drive time CO2 emissions. But the CO2 emissions of the California Prius are assigned to Japan. Its a life cycle WharfRat. A total system. You have to account for all the CO2 emissions... If you actually wanted to be accurate. So, which do you prefer. Real Data and accurate information, or propaganda?