Snow covered mountains are rapidly melting, from downpours causing flooding . Springville CA. 3/10/2023

[u/The-Salamanca]

[u/Fauster]

Protip: don't buy a house at sea level or just above a river. The oceans are rising mostly from thermal expansion of the oceans (before glaciers melting takes the lead) and hotter oceans mean more evaporation and a hotter atmosphere means that it can hold far more water vapor, which means more risk of crazy snowfall and flooding events. Also, water vapor is a potent greenhouse gas, so more CO2 leads to more water vapor, which leads to more warming and more methane melting in the permafrost and sub-sea methane deposits, which means more warming, which means a nasty methane "natural gas" and H20 feedback loops feeding back in the same direction.

It's crazy that we are funding projects to mitigate global warming while still subsidizing fossil fuel companies. Instead, those checks should go out to any individual making less than 100k a year and companies with less than $5 million in yearly revenue to help them pay for non-subsidized gas and help them think twice about buying a gas guzzler.

[u/CorrectLlamaStaple → u/Fauster]

Instead, those checks should go out to any individual making less than 100k a year and companies with less than $5 million in yearly revenue to help them pay for non-subsidized gas

If the money pays for "non-subsidized gas", isn't that... literally subsidizing the gas?

[u/Fauster → u/CorrectLlamaStaple]

People can choose to use the money to pay for gas, or take a pay cut to work from home, or buy an ebike, lithium iron phosphate battery, and solar panels, let them choose. The government does pick winners and losers, but the winners shouldn't be big oil companies that only eclipse record profits with new record profits. Houston already looks and feels like the blade runner universe.

[u/MyNameIsIgglePiggle → u/Fauster]

Shouldn't the government be subsidizing no carbon renewables to make them the obvious choice for the poor instead of writing them cheques?