Give New York what it wants and ban the importation and use of fossil fuels of any kind and for any reason. The effects of this ban will be interesting to observe.
@@franciscoshi1968 LOL that is funny. Do you know how many cars and trucks are in NY? I guess not. Turn off the gas pump and the people will freeze and starve. Lefty logic is always fun.
@@vincentcausey8498 If you do the research, as I have done in the past, you will find the data, scientific papers, analysis and assumptions made. You may agree or disagree with some parts, as I did, and I'm an environmentalist. I don't have it lying around, but you can find that 6 trillion number, It just takes an hour or three to dig it up.
@@vincentcausey8498 Search for a 2022 report: understanding how oil companies pay taxes. Search for Oil and Gas Companies Indirectly Bailed Out by the Fed. Search trump stimulus bill oil gas subsidies. Read up on the Pennsylvania governor signs 667 million fracking tax credit for how states do it. The information is out there.
Scientists were talking about climate change from fossil fuels over a hundred years ago! If you Google Popular Mechanics March 1912, there is an article on page 87 titled 'Remarkable Weather of 1911' that talks about how burning coal releases CO2, and will cause climate changes. It's readily available on Google Books. A very interesting read. The whole magazine is fascinating..
💯!!! Corporations privatize profits and socialize expenses. Consumers, workers, society and the climate are always left holding the bag. If we jointly own the liabilities, we should jointly own the corporations. After all, that’s why banks charge interest and why insurance companies charge premiums. Because they own the risk.
Corporations are a product of govt. + business, cronies protecting themselves against retribution for crimes. We suffer, they exploit us. "Govt. is the problem, not the solution." - POTUS Ronald Reagan.
It’s much easier to advocate for something positive than to fight against something negative. For instance, supporting customer rights: Every gas station should be required to have at least one fast charging point starting today. By tomorrow, there should be two; the day after, three. The same principle can apply to other areas of progress.
Agree. 5 minute recharges and a gradual phase in the recharging stations at existing service stations is a must along with cheap electricity. The batteries are in the stone age currently with innovations coming along with infrastructure.
That's what's happening in America. Convinience store chains with gas pumps are installing EV chargers almost everywhere. And that rate is really intensifying with the addition of IONNA coming into the market. They opened 4 sites yesterday.
And we wonder why business is booming in places like Tennessee and Texas. It's a tax, and the costs will show up in the form of higher costs of living and less jobs as businesses move elsewhere.
Paul, the US insurance industry is collapsing throughout the recently fiery West and flooded coasts. That is making millions of homes too expensive to live in and impossible to sell. Why are you ok with that tax?
Making touch with financial advisors like Elizabeth Regina Nelson who can assist you restructure your portfolio, would be a very creative option. Personal financial management will be crucial to navigating the next difficult times
Elizabeth Regina Nelson has really set the standard for others to follow, we love her here in the Uk 🇬🇧 as she has been really helpful and changed lots of life's.
Unfortunately, not all of us were financially literate early. I was 35 when I finally educated myself and started taking steps. I went from $176,000 in debt with zero savings or retirement to now, 2 years later, fully debt-free and over $1000,000 net worth. I know that doesn't SOUND like a lot, but I'm incredibly proud of it. Now I'm fast-tracking my wealth building (investing $400,000 annually) and don't owe a dime to anyone. It's a good feeling!
These sort of things remind me of cases against Tobacco companies, which caused governments billions of dollars in health care costs which Tobacco companies ended up having to pay. There's too much to go into, but this was the right thing to do then, and seems to be the right thing to do now for polluters.
If I were the fossil fuel industry I would counter sue on the grounds that the New York law is an implicit admission by the state that they are complicit in allowing the use of fossil fuels even though they now know that they are bad. If New York wants to sue the industry for damages then first New York must entirely ban the use of fossil fuels now that they've recognized that they are bad. At least that is the legal tactic I would take.
And with three airports with planes taking off every 1.5 minutes and pumping out carcinogenic fumes, NY city needs to be very careful. People who live in glass houses….
That would prove NY’s case. That is called extortion. On the other hand, if states can’t recover their outlays for climate death and damage, then they will transition more quickly and decisively
And who do you think is going to pay for this fine? The consumers and stake holders will. Lawyers will be the biggest winners and will do the least amount of work. ( This is a political move and normal behavior for New York) I lived in New York, moved out years ago because of these indirect taxes they seem to be good at. And I don't plan on ever moving back. Note I do believe in new tech/renewable energy, and companies should be rewarded from the consumers, not taxed through penalties to reward lawyers and corruption in New York.
As we know without fossil humanity is still in stone age. Thanks to fossil we have best life ever. If they will punished because they contribute more than 1000 trillion dollars to the well being of humans, maybe they should stop for just one month not delivering any fuels to NY. See how they will beg for fuels when they as society collapsing.
Electric Viking: How is most electricity produced? Yep...that would be fossil fuels. Also, there is no way government can create a rule/law that fines companies for something done before the law was implemented.
The government of my small country (currently one very old nuclear power station) has also "decided" that there will be 10 new nuclear power stations build. That means they will possibly provide building permits for 10, there will be no subsidies, not even for a single one. The reason they where not build till now never had anything to do with protestors or building permits. We build a brand new coal power station without permits and despite all protests and the permits where handed out when the construction was completed. The real issue is that there are no investors because nuclear power stations are not economically profitable, especially not when they take years to build, while renewable energy is expanding every month. Sure there are power companies that will build one and would like to own it if the government pays for it. I suspect the deal with Trump is similar, he will provide the permits if any investor is dumb enough to build one.
we shouldn’t fine the industries that built everything and run everything we take for granted in modern life. Rather let’s just focus on transitioning to newer forms of energy.
The neatest thing about solar is that you don't have to depend on a utility or a power station. You can become your own power provider and utility. This may be why the fossil fuel industry has been slow to build solar and wind farms. They realize that solar power in particular cannot be made a monopoly nor is it a diminishing resource... which allows for price control.
Really, I looked into solar here in Canada, which was offering loans for that purpose and found the space populated by charlatans, idiots and liars who couldn't make a cost effective case for the switch. The moment this change, if I live long enough, I will get onboard.
The first step to stopping oil is to invest in renewables. When the long term effect of renewables offset oil, then you can make the argument 'Oil is no longer profitable, so the investment has to be renewables' use capitalism to dismantle oil etc.
Its a good idea in principle and I am all for anything that helps to reduce pollution but the oil companies won't be paying it. They will pass the cost on to the consumer and it just becomes another green tax. Oil based products will be around for a long time while we transition to a "greener" environment so everyone will end up paying for it.
I loathe the people that idle cars in parking lots on hot summer days so they can keep their A/C on. They need to make that a crime here in California.
Oil is a massively expensive product. It’s great that some portion of the external costs may begin to be paid. Payment of external costs keeps capitalism viable.
And yet. You use AC all summer long like everyone else. Sell your cars. Rent a small apartment etc etc you should be. Charged for Crimes for wanting others to live by crows. You will live by. This is why california is imploading!
I’m a truck driver and I’m always infuriated by truck drivers who idle their trucks all night at truck stops when the temps are above 50 degrees Fahrenheit.
I’m a Dr (Chest Radiologist). In the UK 72% of lung cancer cases are attributed to smoking. Love the channel but please don’t spread medical misinformation.
This is true pretty much around the world. Your point is well made. However, particulate from internal combustion is a very real health risk and probably to some of the other small cell carcinomas.
I am a 5th year medical student. There is no misinformation. Inhaling vehicle exhaust fumes increase the risk of lung cancer. Just because the majority of lung cancer is linked to smoking doesn’t mean every case is. What about the remaining 28%?
@@yuvingoonewardene7920 Most modern gasoline cars emit no particulates, and only very tiny traces of NOx and CO. EVs emit MORE particulates than ICE vehicles because they wear tires TWICE as fast. So EVs are WORSE.
@@dzcav3 - the tyre wear claim is not true. The origin of this story an analysis report by Emission Analytics that was performed on ICE cars, not EVs, that determined more particulates came from tyres than the exhaust systems (specifically those adhering to new European standards). This was misattributed to EVs by a negative press article, to which Emission Analytics published a rebuttle clarification that their report related to ICE cars not EVs and that well driven EVs produce much lower emissions than ICE vehicles. As most EV drivers drive for efficiency the majority are very well driven. This has been validated by the leasing industry who have stated the wear on tyres is no worse than ICE, or indeed better due to regerative braking reducing tyre friction wear. Similarly, brake pad particulates are higher on ICE vehicles than EVs again due to the role of regenerative braking.
I am not sure CA will do this. Have you been to LA and seen all the oil wells pumping away out there? The state gets taxes off of each one of those. Not sure they will want to bite their own arm off unless they are certain that they can get more from the fossil fuel companies first. They will want to wait to see how the New York law pans out. Which might take decades given how slow the legal system runs.
So are they going to fine all the car drivers that burned that fuel? I am all for change to EV but this is stupid. What would happen if tomorrow all the oil companies said we are no longer selling oil or gas to NY? It would destroy the whole state. People would freeze in their homes in the winter, no one could drive their petrol cars and go to work.
New York is where Wall Street is. It's where the banks are. There is zero chance of the fossil fuel industry doing any such thing, even if they practically could.
So you are basing your decision (don't fine fossil fuel companies) on an impossible event (they will no longer sell their product at a profit). What would happen tomorrow if the Yellowstone caldera blew up? Guess I'll base all my decisions on that happening.
Mr. Viking @ 6:55 "Regardless how you feel about it, it is going to happen [NY fines]." I would be willing to give Mr. Viking 4 to 1 odds on that unlikely outcome. He is willing to believe and propagate any unlikely claim if it suits his agenda.
As of now, several lawsuits against fossil fuel companies have made headlines, but few have resulted in significant legal victories. Here are some key points: California: Some cases have been dismissed, while others are still ongoing. Cities like San Francisco and Oakland saw their lawsuits dismissed, but they have appealed those decisions. New Jersey: The state’s lawsuit against fossil fuel companies is still pending, and no final judgment has been reached. Massachusetts: A lawsuit against ExxonMobil regarding climate risk disclosures is ongoing, with the company fighting the allegations. Washington: The state has pursued legal action but has faced challenges in the courts, with some cases dismissed. Overall, while these lawsuits have raised awareness and sparked important discussions about accountability, achieving successful legal outcomes has proven challenging. Many cases are still in progress, and outcomes can vary significantly based on legal arguments and interpretations.
I’m fine with legal accountability for fraud and misrepresentation, including fines to big oil for those acts. I’m not okay with performative politics where sanctimonious narcissists advance their political career by fining companies for serving the public with something that the public asked for. I suspect anyone who sees these suits as purely one or the other are being naive because the reality there is a probably a healthy dose of each.
You are my hero Viking, saying what is obvious & calling out vile, poisonous idiots. Clinging to emotional stupidity of not liking change - for better, for everyone’s health & planet. It’s not just lying media, we’ve all been lied to, but the good information is there to see.
Where's the infrastructure and non-fossil fuel power? No amount of windmills and solar can power the nation with cheap electricity without nuclear energy. 5 minute recharges and lighter less toxic batteries and the electric vehicles will sell like hotcakes. All these supposed climate rescue ideas will adversely affect the poor and middle class working stiffs.
Great news. Every country and city should be fining fossil fuel companies to account for all damages including health, climate, flood, freak weather incidents etc.
Bloody awesome thing. Yes it will be in The courts for ages but they need to be held accountable and taxed or fined to fund any cleanup. I hope this succeeds.
They need to build out the EV supercharging networks like they did with the NBN. If you build it they will come, so to speak. i.e. EV buyers. The charging infrastructure or lack of it is the key to massive adoption of EVs. They should also set a minimum charging speed of new electric vehicles. e.g. say 300 kW, perhaps even higher. Say 500 kW. That way they don't hog EV charging stations for too long, thus EV charging wait times and queue lengths are reduced. That means faster charging overall and fewer EV fast charging stations required. Optimising the use of fast charging infrastructure and reduce wait times would be critical to mass adoption of EVs.
@@lysambodiaIt's too expensive, requires too many batteries, storage, etc. There's papers on this. The solution is higher density, advanced battery technology. Which is happening and will soon eliminate range anxiety even for road warriors.
We need 5 minute complete charges to complete with the convenience of petrol. Concerning diesel powered 18 wheelers, you can rub the inside of the tailpipes and stay clean they run so efficiently with modern emission controls.
Who is going to pay for it??? You people live in a complete fantasy world. The current electrical grid in the major cities needs major and expensive upgrades to supply the amount of electricity that you are talking about. Creating a national network will be astronomical. ((Once you get a few fuel stations installing EV fast chargers you then need to upgrade the high tension lines and high power transformers that feed those sub-stations - and then of course the generators themselves. Oh, and all those high capacity lines are much heavier than the current ones so you have to re-build all the transmission towers themselves. Oh, and then there's the small issue of the high-power transformers - there is currently a global shortage and a waiting list of up to 5 years to get them.)) Watch this report to see what is required ruclips.net/video/IGzhsNbmfKk/видео.html
This is wonderful news!!! All fossil fuel companies need class action lawsuits against them to fund the renewable energy transition, fund medical damages they’ve caused and sued into bankruptcy.
I take it then that you have lived in a cave during the time period mentioned not using a single thing that came from fossil fuels and of course didn't burn any wood to keep warm relying on animal skins for warmth, right? If you didn't you are as guilty and deserving of a penalty as the energy companies.
Hello Mr Evans, here's a question for you. Do you know when the new airless tires will become available, socalled uptis. Also is the assumption that they will cause less friction, thus less polution in the air correct?
Hopefully it can But even if not, there are many countries around the World who could, and hopefully will. Not all governments put the wants of corporations above the health and well-being of their people.
It’s about time there was accountability for the fossil fuel companies. Absurdly in Australia both of the major political parties have been subsidising the fossil fuel companies for decades even though the damage caused by extreme weather events is escalating. It would seem both of them have been purchased by the mining lobby. We are indeed a third world oligarchy.
There is no “free” ride environmentally regardless of the choice made. The mining and production for whatever power source you’re choosing is going to have an impact, but I note that the solar/wind people fail to actually acknowledge that. Solar and wind simply can’t compete with the energy density and small physical footprint of nuclear power plants. And I’m currently looking at putting solar on my home.
Thank you. Small, modern nuclear reactors supplying several states should provide adequate inexpensive electricity available at existing service station.
How are the materials used to manufacture solar panels, batteries, windmills, etc., obtained? Are they obtained in a polluting manner requiring heavy use of fossil fuels? Can ‘green energy’ infrastructure be manufactured using green energy? Are solar farms and windmill farms environmentally friendly? Are these farms usurping land that could be used to do actual farming to feed people? Can green energy save German industry? If so, why are manufacturing companies leaving Germany in droves? Things always look brighter, shinier, and cleaner to the naive, simplistic, and ill-informed who never peek behind the curtain and look carefully at the back room.
Pro tip: if your device has an app called a "browser", or maybe a box at the bottom where you can type, you can ask it these questions. Pro tip 2: you'll find the complete answers aren't the damning evidence you were hoping for.
Well said, this is the problem, the net zero zealots are like children having a tantrum in the shop when their Mother won't let them have a candy bar. They want net zero NOW, they don't want to consider the practical reality of what a mess it's making to economies, or how much the poor are suffering with skyrocketing energy prices. It's all about their feelings, it's pathetic.
If we taxpayers 'own' the risk and damages then we should own a share of these businesses. Anyone having cancer or losing a family member to cancer should be able to sue their respective governments for compensation. Hospital cancer wards need to be fully funded by polluting businesses not by taxpayers, we don't cause the problems they do.
We should sue the oil companies for the damages of climate destruction and put them out of business. If fossil fuel companies had to pay for the damages from which they profit, their product would be unaffordable and they couldnt compete in the marketplace.
If California can require the auto industry to build enough fuel-efficient cars to meet the CAFE standards, why can't they require oil & gas companies to produce a percentage of clean, CO₂-free energy? Of course they can, and they should do it. NY would follow.
They should hold the nuclear regulatory commission and other nuclear proponents responsible for misleading the public about the true cost of refining nuclear fuel as pointed out By Admiral Rick over in 1965
Are the oil companies responsible for emissions or is it the drivers that buy the gas and burn it up. Answer: both! What about the companies that sell the oil companies the machinery needed to drill and distribute oil? Shouldn't they and their employees be punished too?
Good thing. That said … just a suggestion Sam. In this episode's name you say "New York". When people are deciding, i.e. prior to actually watching/listening, whether it's about something NY State vs. NYC decided. B-I-G difference in political mindset.
This is a great idea. The fastest way to transition to a cleaner planet is to fine them and make fuel prices jump too. Double the price of fuel, triple the price. People will get an EV.
Perhaps ban large cities & this would reduce localised heavy pollution & shift people out the country & give an incentive to people to limit family size.
It'll probably end up in negotiated settlements to improve the emissions from the affected power plants and other sources over a timeline (refineries, chemical processing plants, etc will be involved). That's what's been done in California, new regulations usually result in negotiated timelines for installing improvements.
great comment on the people sitting in their cars outside of schools with their engines running at idle. In winter the excuse could be that they would get cold but this is just a nasty habbit as it happens all year round and there's difficulties talking about it due to this attitude that they'll do what they want and who are you to critisize me.
Sam, you're off-base on a couple things: 1. Governments do many things efficiently. 2. The fossil fuel companies will be around forever. We still have a tobacco industry after all these years of knowing that it causes cancer, the tobacco industry never suffered for all the damage they did - look - the wealthy and powerful always take care of themselves
By the time these nuclear power plants get off the drawing board, renewables with battery backup could be supplying 75% of the market at unbeatable prices. At that point these plans would be mothballed, however the US being a nuclear power, will always operate nuclear power plant technology, as would any space faring civilization.
We need a separation of business and govt., step 1. Next, a new form of govt. that is not allowed secrecy, deadly threats (law), fraud. A voluntarily financed, non-monopoly protection agency that must compete for our support, like in the financial market. THEN, and only then will we be civilized. It's only logical.
My thoughts? Just checked. ExxonMobil made a PROFIT of 86 BILLION dollars for 2024 after just 3 quarters. The California High Speed Rail system is estimated to cost $106-$128 billion for a total build out. California can get just one fossil fuel behemoth to pay for a system that will go a very long way into eliminating itself. That's what I think.
@davidanderson8469 Okay bot. A. It's not a "bullet train." It's a high speed rail system. B. It is "$100 billion over budget", as there was no budget to begin with. Just cost estimates. If you don't know what terms mean, don't use them. C. There are plenty of videos that the rail authority itself issues showing the progress, and the actual rail line being laid, that is all over RUclips. You're a bot, so I know your programming is limited, however I would have expected your programmer to have developed your "silent mode" better, upon you not knowing what you're talking about.
Several key obstacles hinder the success of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies: Legal Precedents: Courts often rely on existing legal precedents, which may not favor climate-related claims. Previous cases have resulted in dismissals, making it difficult for new lawsuits to gain traction. Proving Causation: Plaintiffs must demonstrate a direct link between the actions of fossil fuel companies and specific climate-related damages. This can be complex and challenging to establish. Jurisdiction Issues: Many lawsuits face jurisdictional challenges, as fossil fuel companies can argue that they should be tried in different courts or states, complicating the legal process. Political Influence: Fossil fuel companies often have significant political and economic power, which can affect court proceedings and legislative support for climate accountability. Resource Disparity: Fossil fuel companies typically have vast legal resources to mount extensive defenses, making it difficult for state and local governments to sustain prolonged legal battles. Scientific Uncertainty: The complexity of climate science can lead to debates about the extent of responsibility and impact, complicating legal arguments. These obstacles contribute to the overall difficulty of achieving successful outcomes in climate-related lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.
North Carolina mountains still need a lot of help from big oil, as government doesn't seem to have enough money to handle consistent environmental disasters easily linked to global warming. But have doubts of success with drill baby drill head in sand attitude coming soon
Hey, Sam, could you please do investigative pieces on a windmill factory, a solar panel factory, and a battery factory. Be sure to highlight where all the raw materials come from and how they are obtained. Are the factories themselves environmentally friendly? Do they produce toxic effluents? Are windmill factories powered by windmills, solar panel factories powered by solar panels, and battery factories powered by batteries?
Of course manufacturing batteries and solar projects can cause pollution. But they're a step in the right direction. Oil funds terrorism and keeps the world in a capitalist nightmare. And gasoline car fires are rampant, killing people, the fumes are killing people, making the air unhealthy and smelling disgusting.
Yes, and make it a side by side comparison with the oil industry and how and where they resource their materials to build out the oil industry and supporting industries. Should be real interesting indeed. 🤔
South Australia is experiencing growth for the first time in years thanks to all the cheap solar and wind power which regularly exceeds 100% of the states energy needs. So if you buy solar panels made in Australia, since the only solar panel manufacturer in Australia is in South Australia, your panels are made with between 80 and 100% renewable energy.
Are you going to apologize to BYD now for helping spread that hit piece about slave labor in Brazil. The workers have come out and said they were mistranslated by the people who came to do the interviews.
Governor Hoh-chew? Ah ha ha ha! It's actually said like HOH-kill... I t sort of rhymes with "coal kill" actually. Sorry, I gotta rib you a bit on that Sam! ;)
“If you don’t like this information, unsubscribe because you’re an idiot!” 😂 Lol. That’s why we love you, Sam!
Give New York what it wants and ban the importation and use of fossil fuels of any kind and for any reason. The effects of this ban will be interesting to observe.
They will switch to electric quicker and will enjoy clean air sooner.
@@franciscoshi1968 LOL that is funny. Do you know how many cars and trucks are in NY? I guess not. Turn off the gas pump and the people will freeze and starve. Lefty logic is always fun.
just end the 6 trillion subsidies to the industry...
Subsidies? I've yet to hear anyone actually specify what these subsidies are or in what form they occur?
@@vincentcausey8498there are none it’s a made up fallacy of the pig ignorant radicals…
@@vincentcausey8498 If you do the research, as I have done in the past, you will find the data, scientific papers, analysis and assumptions made. You may agree or disagree with some parts, as I did, and I'm an environmentalist. I don't have it lying around, but you can find that 6 trillion number, It just takes an hour or three to dig it up.
That figure has been proven false. It was made up out of thin air.
@@vincentcausey8498 Search for a 2022 report: understanding how oil companies pay taxes.
Search for Oil and Gas Companies Indirectly Bailed Out by the Fed.
Search trump stimulus bill oil gas subsidies.
Read up on the Pennsylvania governor signs 667 million fracking tax credit for how states do it.
The information is out there.
Scientists were talking about climate change from fossil fuels over a hundred years ago! If you Google Popular Mechanics March 1912, there is an article on page 87 titled 'Remarkable Weather of 1911' that talks about how burning coal releases CO2, and will cause climate changes. It's readily available on Google Books. A very interesting read. The whole magazine is fascinating..
And it was all nonsense back then too.
Corporations always want to privatize all the profit they can, but want risks & damages past to tax payers.
💯!!! Corporations privatize profits and socialize expenses. Consumers, workers, society and the climate are always left holding the bag. If we jointly own the liabilities, we should jointly own the corporations. After all, that’s why banks charge interest and why insurance companies charge premiums. Because they own the risk.
Corporations are a product of govt. + business, cronies protecting themselves against retribution for crimes. We suffer, they exploit us. "Govt. is the problem, not the solution." - POTUS Ronald Reagan.
@@1voluntaryistReagan sure was great at building up the private war business.
It’s much easier to advocate for something positive than to fight against something negative.
For instance, supporting customer rights:
Every gas station should be required to have at least one fast charging point starting today.
By tomorrow, there should be two; the day after, three.
The same principle can apply to other areas of progress.
Agree. 5 minute recharges and a gradual phase in the recharging stations at existing service stations is a must along with cheap electricity. The batteries are in the stone age currently with innovations coming along with infrastructure.
That's what's happening in America. Convinience store chains with gas pumps are installing EV chargers almost everywhere. And that rate is really intensifying with the addition of IONNA coming into the market. They opened 4 sites yesterday.
And we wonder why business is booming in places like Tennessee and Texas. It's a tax, and the costs will show up in the form of higher costs of living and less jobs as businesses move elsewhere.
Paul, the US insurance industry is collapsing throughout the recently fiery West and flooded coasts. That is making millions of homes too expensive to live in and impossible to sell. Why are you ok with that tax?
@@freeheeler09 Yea, I hear condos in Florida are a real "wealth builder" right now. LOL
I'm glad you made this video it reminds me of my transformation from a nobody to good home, $34k monthly and a good daughter full of love
My advice to everyone is that saving is great but investment is the key to be successful imagine investing $15,000 and received $472,700.
wow this awesome I'm 47 and have been looking for ways to be successful, please how??
Making touch with financial advisors like Elizabeth Regina Nelson who can assist you restructure your portfolio, would be a very creative option. Personal financial management will be crucial to navigating the next difficult times
Elizabeth Regina Nelson has really set the standard for others to follow, we love her here in the Uk 🇬🇧 as she has been really helpful and changed lots of life's.
Unfortunately, not all of us were financially literate early. I was 35 when I finally educated myself and started taking steps. I went from $176,000 in debt with zero savings or retirement to now, 2 years later, fully debt-free and over $1000,000 net worth. I know that doesn't SOUND like a lot, but I'm incredibly proud of it. Now I'm fast-tracking my wealth building (investing $400,000 annually) and don't owe a dime to anyone. It's a good feeling!
I see NY is out and about to find new creative ways of paying for their sprawling bureaucracy
and so people have clean air to breathe and slow global warming
@@b4804514 how exactly paying NY you think is going to improve air quality? You sure?
@b4804514 it will be a non-issue in 10 years, evs everywhere by then, this is stupid government money graving
These sort of things remind me of cases against Tobacco companies, which caused governments billions of dollars in health care costs which Tobacco companies ended up having to pay. There's too much to go into, but this was the right thing to do then, and seems to be the right thing to do now for polluters.
wr
If I were the fossil fuel industry I would counter sue on the grounds that the New York law is an implicit admission by the state that they are complicit in allowing the use of fossil fuels even though they now know that they are bad.
If New York wants to sue the industry for damages then first New York must entirely ban the use of fossil fuels now that they've recognized that they are bad.
At least that is the legal tactic I would take.
And with three airports with planes taking off every 1.5 minutes and pumping out carcinogenic fumes, NY city needs to be very careful. People who live in glass houses….
Nick I agree completely. It's absurd, politically motivated, hypocritical money grabbing.
Good luck in court with this one....
They should stop selling energy to New York State.
That would prove NY’s case. That is called extortion. On the other hand, if states can’t recover their outlays for climate death and damage, then they will transition more quickly and decisively
And who do you think is going to pay for this fine? The consumers and stake holders will. Lawyers will be the biggest winners and will do the least amount of work. ( This is a political move and normal behavior for New York) I lived in New York, moved out years ago because of these indirect taxes they seem to be good at. And I don't plan on ever moving back. Note I do believe in new tech/renewable energy, and companies should be rewarded from the consumers, not taxed through penalties to reward lawyers and corruption in New York.
As we know without fossil humanity is still in stone age. Thanks to fossil we have best life ever. If they will punished because they contribute more than 1000 trillion dollars to the well being of humans, maybe they should stop for just one month not delivering any fuels to NY. See how they will beg for fuels when they as society collapsing.
Electric Viking: How is most electricity produced? Yep...that would be fossil fuels. Also, there is no way government can create a rule/law that fines companies for something done before the law was implemented.
The green energy transition is worth doing on air pollution grounds alone. I’m a New Yorker and I am in favor of this law. Go New York!
Get ready for higher energy prices. Y’all are about to become the next California trying to be too liberal but end up hurting residents on the process
The government of my small country (currently one very old nuclear power station) has also "decided" that there will be 10 new nuclear power stations build. That means they will possibly provide building permits for 10, there will be no subsidies, not even for a single one. The reason they where not build till now never had anything to do with protestors or building permits. We build a brand new coal power station without permits and despite all protests and the permits where handed out when the construction was completed. The real issue is that there are no investors because nuclear power stations are not economically profitable, especially not when they take years to build, while renewable energy is expanding every month. Sure there are power companies that will build one and would like to own it if the government pays for it. I suspect the deal with Trump is similar, he will provide the permits if any investor is dumb enough to build one.
Thank you. France gets it. Nuclear energy will electrify the nation with clean carbon free power to fuel the transformation.
Why wait for this market pump if there are more stable assets, like staking or elizzarda?
we shouldn’t fine the industries that built everything and run everything we take for granted in modern life. Rather let’s just focus on transitioning to newer forms of energy.
It will never happen. Fuel companies will just have to stop supplying fuel for a week and watch the polys start crying when everything shuts down.
And shut down Wall Street and the banks? It wouldn't just cripple New York. It would cripple the U.S. economy.
The neatest thing about solar is that you don't have to depend on a utility or a power station.
You can become your own power provider and utility.
This may be why the fossil fuel industry has been slow to build solar and wind farms. They realize that solar power in particular cannot be made a monopoly nor is it a diminishing resource... which allows for price control.
Really, I looked into solar here in Canada, which was offering loans for that purpose and found the space populated by charlatans, idiots and liars who couldn't make a cost effective case for the switch. The moment this change, if I live long enough, I will get onboard.
Is New York going to stop importing oil products while this lawsuit goes on, or will they be the hypocrites?
"Oil products" are not the issue. Burning oil is. We need oil products, we just do not need to be burning it.
The first step to stopping oil is to invest in renewables. When the long term effect of renewables offset oil, then you can make the argument 'Oil is no longer profitable, so the investment has to be renewables' use capitalism to dismantle oil etc.
The electric car industry will succeed faster when the “green” community stops trying to kill the gasoline car industry.
That makes no sense, at all.
@@garymunson2493exactly
Its a good idea in principle and I am all for anything that helps to reduce pollution but the oil companies won't be paying it. They will pass the cost on to the consumer and it just becomes another green tax. Oil based products will be around for a long time while we transition to a "greener" environment so everyone will end up paying for it.
NY and CA will save us from the insanity about to happen, and happening already, in DC! Thanks, as always, Sam !
Big shoutout to the guy in the comments who recommended Elizzarda to me-you really helped me out. Thanks a ton 🤝🤝🤝
Complete madness. How do you power New York at night during winter? Duh!
What damage has there been in New York?
You get wind camels
Sun shines in winter rtard
Energy price in winter 20x more ;)
I loathe the people that idle cars in parking lots on hot summer days so they can keep their A/C on. They need to make that a crime here in California.
If they really wanted to reduce pollution they would do that but they would rather increase prices and have poor people do without it.
I hate people like you. Judging people all the time should be a jaillable offence.
Oil is a massively expensive product. It’s great that some portion of the external costs may begin to be paid.
Payment of external costs keeps capitalism viable.
Except for animal power and wood in some areas all energy systems work that way.
And yet. You use AC all summer long like everyone else. Sell your cars. Rent a small apartment etc etc you should be. Charged for Crimes for wanting others to live by crows. You will live by. This is why california is imploading!
I’m a truck driver and I’m always infuriated by truck drivers who idle their trucks all night at truck stops when the temps are above 50 degrees Fahrenheit.
Sugar also cause cancer
Living causes cancer.
I’m a Dr (Chest Radiologist). In the UK 72% of lung cancer cases are attributed to smoking. Love the channel but please don’t spread medical misinformation.
This is true pretty much around the world. Your point is well made. However, particulate from internal combustion is a very real health risk and probably to some of the other small cell carcinomas.
I am a 5th year medical student. There is no misinformation. Inhaling vehicle exhaust fumes increase the risk of lung cancer. Just because the majority of lung cancer is linked to smoking doesn’t mean every case is. What about the remaining 28%?
@@michaelginever732 Are you including emissions from Euro 6 engines, or is this something that applies to older models?
@@yuvingoonewardene7920 Most modern gasoline cars emit no particulates, and only very tiny traces of NOx and CO. EVs emit MORE particulates than ICE vehicles because they wear tires TWICE as fast. So EVs are WORSE.
@@dzcav3 - the tyre wear claim is not true. The origin of this story an analysis report by Emission Analytics that was performed on ICE cars, not EVs, that determined more particulates came from tyres than the exhaust systems (specifically those adhering to new European standards). This was misattributed to EVs by a negative press article, to which Emission Analytics published a rebuttle clarification that their report related to ICE cars not EVs and that well driven EVs produce much lower emissions than ICE vehicles. As most EV drivers drive for efficiency the majority are very well driven. This has been validated by the leasing industry who have stated the wear on tyres is no worse than ICE, or indeed better due to regerative braking reducing tyre friction wear. Similarly, brake pad particulates are higher on ICE vehicles than EVs again due to the role of regenerative braking.
Are you kidding?!?!?! This will go down in flames. Sorry, it will.
no it will work
I am not sure CA will do this. Have you been to LA and seen all the oil wells pumping away out there? The state gets taxes off of each one of those. Not sure they will want to bite their own arm off unless they are certain that they can get more from the fossil fuel companies first. They will want to wait to see how the New York law pans out. Which might take decades given how slow the legal system runs.
Great to see you enjoying yourself and really providing a great service!
Typical Democrat Governor, not really surprised.
Climate Justice!
@@Scion2112bro no he didn’t. It’s literally from Reuters and Associated Press yesterday.
Climate quacks
wrr
The costs will just get passed on to the little guy trying to get to work. Lawyers will get rich just a scam.
Yep. The little guy will once bear the brunt of this change.
Thank you so much for bringing up the cancer aspect of fossil fuels. So few seem to understand this!
So are they going to fine all the car drivers that burned that fuel? I am all for change to EV but this is stupid. What would happen if tomorrow all the oil companies said we are no longer selling oil or gas to NY? It would destroy the whole state. People would freeze in their homes in the winter, no one could drive their petrol cars and go to work.
New York is where Wall Street is. It's where the banks are.
There is zero chance of the fossil fuel industry doing any such thing, even if they practically could.
Its not stupid.
It's what every state should do.
So you are basing your decision (don't fine fossil fuel companies) on an impossible event (they will no longer sell their product at a profit). What would happen tomorrow if the Yellowstone caldera blew up? Guess I'll base all my decisions on that happening.
Accountability
Mr. Viking @ 6:55 "Regardless how you feel about it, it is going to happen [NY fines]."
I would be willing to give Mr. Viking 4 to 1 odds on that unlikely outcome. He is willing to believe and propagate any unlikely claim if it suits his agenda.
These costs are passed on to the customer. It's the people who will end up paying for this.
They won't have any costumers.
Well, according to Trump, tariffs are not going to be passed on to the consumers, you just have to follow his logic on this one too.
Good
Bah hahahahahah look at how much solar panels cost compared to Australia, you have already lost
As of now, several lawsuits against fossil fuel companies have made headlines, but few have resulted in significant legal victories. Here are some key points:
California: Some cases have been dismissed, while others are still ongoing. Cities like San Francisco and Oakland saw their lawsuits dismissed, but they have appealed those decisions.
New Jersey: The state’s lawsuit against fossil fuel companies is still pending, and no final judgment has been reached.
Massachusetts: A lawsuit against ExxonMobil regarding climate risk disclosures is ongoing, with the company fighting the allegations.
Washington: The state has pursued legal action but has faced challenges in the courts, with some cases dismissed.
Overall, while these lawsuits have raised awareness and sparked important discussions about accountability, achieving successful legal outcomes has proven challenging. Many cases are still in progress, and outcomes can vary significantly based on legal arguments and interpretations.
I’m fine with legal accountability for fraud and misrepresentation, including fines to big oil for those acts.
I’m not okay with performative politics where sanctimonious narcissists advance their political career by fining companies for serving the public with something that the public asked for. I suspect anyone who sees these suits as purely one or the other are being naive because the reality there is a probably a healthy dose of each.
You are my hero Viking, saying what is obvious & calling out vile, poisonous idiots. Clinging to emotional stupidity of not liking change - for better, for everyone’s health & planet. It’s not just lying media, we’ve all been lied to, but the good information is there to see.
Where's the infrastructure and non-fossil fuel power? No amount of windmills and solar can power the nation with cheap electricity without nuclear energy. 5 minute recharges and lighter less toxic batteries and the electric vehicles will sell like hotcakes. All these supposed climate rescue ideas will adversely affect the poor and middle class working stiffs.
Great news. Every country and city should be fining fossil fuel companies to account for all damages including health, climate, flood, freak weather incidents etc.
Bloody awesome thing. Yes it will be in The courts for ages but they need to be held accountable and taxed or fined to fund any cleanup. I hope this succeeds.
They need to build out the EV supercharging networks like they did with the NBN. If you build it they will come, so to speak. i.e. EV buyers. The charging infrastructure or lack of it is the key to massive adoption of EVs. They should also set a minimum charging speed of new electric vehicles. e.g. say 300 kW, perhaps even higher. Say 500 kW. That way they don't hog EV charging stations for too long, thus EV charging wait times and queue lengths are reduced. That means faster charging overall and fewer EV fast charging stations required. Optimising the use of fast charging infrastructure and reduce wait times would be critical to mass adoption of EVs.
Battery swapping is the future
@@lysambodiaIt's too expensive, requires too many batteries, storage, etc. There's papers on this. The solution is higher density, advanced battery technology. Which is happening and will soon eliminate range anxiety even for road warriors.
We need 5 minute complete charges to complete with the convenience of petrol. Concerning diesel powered 18 wheelers, you can rub the inside of the tailpipes and stay clean they run so efficiently with modern emission controls.
Who is going to pay for it???
You people live in a complete fantasy world.
The current electrical grid in the major cities needs major and expensive upgrades to supply the amount of electricity that you are talking about.
Creating a national network will be astronomical.
((Once you get a few fuel stations installing EV fast chargers you then need to upgrade the high tension lines and high power transformers that feed those sub-stations - and then of course the generators themselves. Oh, and all those high capacity lines are much heavier than the current ones so you have to re-build all the transmission towers themselves. Oh, and then there's the small issue of the high-power transformers - there is currently a global shortage and a waiting list of up to 5 years to get them.))
Watch this report to see what is required
ruclips.net/video/IGzhsNbmfKk/видео.html
"if you don't like it, unsubscribe!" 🤣
This is wonderful news!!! All fossil fuel companies need class action lawsuits against them to fund the renewable energy transition, fund medical damages they’ve caused and sued into bankruptcy.
Who pays the oil companies? The consumers of their products. Who will pay for this? The average citizen. Hooray? 😮
I take it then that you have lived in a cave during the time period mentioned not using a single thing that came from fossil fuels and of course didn't burn any wood to keep warm relying on animal skins for warmth, right? If you didn't you are as guilty and deserving of a penalty as the energy companies.
So you want to be the first to go without a car, home heating and lighting and no internet or Iphone! Yay!
Hello Mr Evans, here's a question for you. Do you know when the new airless tires will become available, socalled uptis. Also is the assumption that they will cause less friction, thus less polution in the air correct?
walk through a Bunnings carpark. Loads of large Dual Cab utes with their engines running.
The oil companies won't pay these fines. They will transfer their assets and then go out of business. Good for lawyers.
New York can't do shit.
Hopefully it can
But even if not, there are many countries around the World who could, and hopefully will.
Not all governments put the wants of corporations above the health and well-being of their people.
Looks like NY can..
Governments are not businesses, nor households. You can’t judge govt by private sector standards
Can America or Europe ever come up with affordable EVs on their own like those already in China?
Our state (New York) has also banned hydraulic fracturing. A+
It’s about time there was accountability for the fossil fuel companies. Absurdly in Australia both of the major political parties have been subsidising the fossil fuel companies for decades even though the damage caused by extreme weather events is escalating. It would seem both of them have been purchased by the mining lobby. We are indeed a third world oligarchy.
The trick is to reach the spot where investors in dinosaur fossil fuel companies will run for cover.
There is no “free” ride environmentally regardless of the choice made. The mining and production for whatever power source you’re choosing is going to have an impact, but I note that the solar/wind people fail to actually acknowledge that. Solar and wind simply can’t compete with the energy density and small physical footprint of nuclear power plants. And I’m currently looking at putting solar on my home.
Solar, wind and batteries simply have a far lower impact. That is the whole point and pretty much everybody acknowledges that.
Thank you. Small, modern nuclear reactors supplying several states should provide adequate inexpensive electricity available at existing service station.
It’s a good thing. Elon has been saying for years that we should make those individuals who want to burn fossil fuels pay for that privilege.
How are the materials used to manufacture solar panels, batteries, windmills, etc., obtained? Are they obtained in a polluting manner requiring heavy use of fossil fuels? Can ‘green energy’ infrastructure be manufactured using green energy? Are solar farms and windmill farms environmentally friendly? Are these farms usurping land that could be used to do actual farming to feed people? Can green energy save German industry? If so, why are manufacturing companies leaving Germany in droves? Things always look brighter, shinier, and cleaner to the naive, simplistic, and ill-informed who never peek behind the curtain and look carefully at the back room.
Pro tip: if your device has an app called a "browser", or maybe a box at the bottom where you can type, you can ask it these questions.
Pro tip 2: you'll find the complete answers aren't the damning evidence you were hoping for.
Well said, this is the problem, the net zero zealots are like children having a tantrum in the shop when their Mother won't let them have a candy bar.
They want net zero NOW, they don't want to consider the practical reality of what a mess it's making to economies, or how much the poor are suffering with skyrocketing energy prices.
It's all about their feelings, it's pathetic.
I'll call these the negative incentives. 🤣
This is fantastic.
If we taxpayers 'own' the risk and damages then we should own a share of these businesses. Anyone having cancer or losing a family member to cancer should be able to sue their respective governments for compensation. Hospital cancer wards need to be fully funded by polluting businesses not by taxpayers, we don't cause the problems they do.
We should sue the oil companies for the damages of climate destruction and put them out of business. If fossil fuel companies had to pay for the damages from which they profit, their product would be unaffordable and they couldnt compete in the marketplace.
If California can require the auto industry to build enough fuel-efficient cars to meet the CAFE standards, why can't they require oil & gas companies to produce a percentage of clean, CO₂-free energy? Of course they can, and they should do it. NY would follow.
Fantastic!
Great idea
Thanks for calling them idiots LOL
Fossil fuels to be priced out of use.
They are already doing that, that's why the poor are freezing in Winter.
Dormant commerce clause, U.S. Constitution. Stay tuned.
They should hold the nuclear regulatory commission and other nuclear proponents responsible for misleading the public about the true cost of refining nuclear fuel as pointed out By Admiral Rick over in 1965
A nuclear submarine uses 4 kilograms of fuel to run it for 30 yrs. It's extremely cost efficient.
Are the oil companies responsible for emissions or is it the drivers that buy the gas and burn it up. Answer: both! What about the companies that sell the oil companies the machinery needed to drill and distribute oil? Shouldn't they and their employees be punished too?
Not going to hold my breathe on this one.
Good thing. That said … just a suggestion Sam.
In this episode's name you say "New York". When people are deciding, i.e. prior to actually watching/listening, whether it's about something NY State vs. NYC decided.
B-I-G difference in political mindset.
This is a great idea. The fastest way to transition to a cleaner planet is to fine them and make fuel prices jump too. Double the price of fuel, triple the price. People will get an EV.
Perhaps ban large cities & this would reduce localised heavy pollution & shift people out the country & give an incentive to people to limit family size.
similar to big tobacco
It'll probably end up in negotiated settlements to improve the emissions from the affected power plants and other sources over a timeline (refineries, chemical processing plants, etc will be involved). That's what's been done in California, new regulations usually result in negotiated timelines for installing improvements.
California today is a reservation for high income lefties. They pay about 3 times as much for electric as I do.
great comment on the people sitting in their cars outside of schools with their engines running at idle. In winter the excuse could be that they would get cold but this is just a nasty habbit as it happens all year round and there's difficulties talking about it due to this attitude that they'll do what they want and who are you to critisize me.
Sam, you're off-base on a couple things: 1. Governments do many things efficiently. 2. The fossil fuel companies will be around forever. We still have a tobacco industry after all these years of knowing that it causes cancer, the tobacco industry never suffered for all the damage they did - look - the wealthy and powerful always take care of themselves
By the time these nuclear power plants get off the drawing board, renewables with battery backup could be supplying 75% of the market at unbeatable prices. At that point these plans would be mothballed, however the US being a nuclear power, will always operate nuclear power plant technology, as would any space faring civilization.
Do the calculations on all the materials for batteries. Dream on just another fool that can’t count or do maths….
We need a separation of business and govt., step 1. Next, a new form of govt. that is not allowed secrecy, deadly threats (law), fraud. A voluntarily financed, non-monopoly protection agency that must compete for our support, like in the financial market. THEN, and only then will we be civilized. It's only logical.
Long over due!!!
and here is the moment energy web is coming in the picture ewt for the win
Lets require all air travel be done by electric/solar powered planes, and jets.
Who would invest long-term in fossil fuels?
My thoughts? Just checked. ExxonMobil made a PROFIT of 86 BILLION dollars for 2024 after just 3 quarters. The California High Speed Rail system is estimated to cost $106-$128 billion for a total build out. California can get just one fossil fuel behemoth to pay for a system that will go a very long way into eliminating itself. That's what I think.
How's that Bullet train coming along? $100 bullion over cost without a single inch of track laid.
@davidanderson8469 Okay bot. A. It's not a "bullet train." It's a high speed rail system. B. It is "$100 billion over budget", as there was no budget to begin with. Just cost estimates. If you don't know what terms mean, don't use them. C. There are plenty of videos that the rail authority itself issues showing the progress, and the actual rail line being laid, that is all over RUclips. You're a bot, so I know your programming is limited, however I would have expected your programmer to have developed your "silent mode" better, upon you not knowing what you're talking about.
😂 I think what they need to do is tell New York they’re not going to bring them more fuel and see what they say
It’s pronounced “Ho Cull”, btw.
Several key obstacles hinder the success of lawsuits against fossil fuel companies:
Legal Precedents: Courts often rely on existing legal precedents, which may not favor climate-related claims. Previous cases have resulted in dismissals, making it difficult for new lawsuits to gain traction.
Proving Causation: Plaintiffs must demonstrate a direct link between the actions of fossil fuel companies and specific climate-related damages. This can be complex and challenging to establish.
Jurisdiction Issues: Many lawsuits face jurisdictional challenges, as fossil fuel companies can argue that they should be tried in different courts or states, complicating the legal process.
Political Influence: Fossil fuel companies often have significant political and economic power, which can affect court proceedings and legislative support for climate accountability.
Resource Disparity: Fossil fuel companies typically have vast legal resources to mount extensive defenses, making it difficult for state and local governments to sustain prolonged legal battles.
Scientific Uncertainty: The complexity of climate science can lead to debates about the extent of responsibility and impact, complicating legal arguments.
These obstacles contribute to the overall difficulty of achieving successful outcomes in climate-related lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.
You are a mouthpiece for utopian authoritarianism which always go hand in hand. In the end the consumer and the taxpayers always pay the cost.
The governor's name is pronounced "Hoke-ul"...you'll probably hear it a lot as she and Trump are going to be battling on many issues next year.
Trump will revert that
We have a Federal system.
Of course it would be a Democrat
North Carolina mountains still need a lot of help from big oil, as government doesn't seem to have enough money to handle consistent environmental disasters easily linked to global warming. But have doubts of success with drill baby drill head in sand attitude coming soon
Hey, Sam, could you please do investigative pieces on a windmill factory, a solar panel factory, and a battery factory. Be sure to highlight where all the raw materials come from and how they are obtained. Are the factories themselves environmentally friendly? Do they produce toxic effluents? Are windmill factories powered by windmills, solar panel factories powered by solar panels, and battery factories powered by batteries?
Of course manufacturing batteries and solar projects can cause pollution. But they're a step in the right direction. Oil funds terrorism and keeps the world in a capitalist nightmare. And gasoline car fires are rampant, killing people, the fumes are killing people, making the air unhealthy and smelling disgusting.
Yes, and make it a side by side comparison with the oil industry and how and where they resource their materials to build out the oil industry and supporting industries. Should be real interesting indeed. 🤔
South Australia is experiencing growth for the first time in years thanks to all the cheap solar and wind power which regularly exceeds 100% of the states energy needs. So if you buy solar panels made in Australia, since the only solar panel manufacturer in Australia is in South Australia, your panels are made with between 80 and 100% renewable energy.
Already been done. There's already methods to recycle everything. All 1000 of your fake news stories on EVs and Renewables have already been debunked.
Good job, buddy. Sincerely, Jeff Bezos.
Yeah!
Are you going to apologize to BYD now for helping spread that hit piece about slave labor in Brazil. The workers have come out and said they were mistranslated by the people who came to do the interviews.
Governor Hoh-chew? Ah ha ha ha! It's actually said like HOH-kill... I t sort of rhymes with "coal kill" actually.
Sorry, I gotta rib you a bit on that Sam! ;)