To all of you out there that said Trump doesn't care about the environment, because of that Paris thing or whatever

Page 1 of 4
#2
i am looking awfully silly but it probably has more to do with my hair tbh
and i was wearing boots with shorts today, made me look like a goof
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#3
If it was Trump's idea all along, you might have a point.

Since it wasn't, Trump just thinks the wall will be self-funding, and he won't have to bother getting the Mexicans to pay for it.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#4
Quote by Baby Joel

and i was wearing boots with shorts today, made me look like a goof

Unforgivable tbh
My God, it's full of stars!
#6
Quote by slapsymcdougal
If it was Trump's idea all along, you might have a point.

Since it wasn't, Trump just thinks the wall will be self-funding, and he won't have to bother getting the Mexicans to pay for it.

Exactly. The whole thing is entirely misleading as Trump has had nothing to do with this design. 

How many times does Trump have to say Climate Change is a Chinese Hoax and use the term "clean coal" before people accept the fucker gives no shits about green energy.
Dance in the moonlight my old friend twilight


Quote by metal4eva_22
What's this about ****ing corpses? My UG senses were tingling.
#7
Quote by ultimate-slash
inb4 Mexico builds a slightly higher wall right next to it

Shade.
#9
that is an exceptionally calm duck
Quote by EndTheRapture51
who pays five hundred fucking dollars for a burger
#11
And when it breaks he'll blame it on illegals messing with it or something

Also, the dude gives zero shits about green energy because he lives in lala land, this is not his idea no matter what the headline tried to push as reality
One of the third friendliest users
Stratkat's pet


Quote by Momentosis
Void is a wanker that's why

#14
I remember hearing something about how the production of solar panels is extremely damaging to the environment because of the things they need to mine to get em working

no idea if that's true or not but this is clearly just some dipshitted effort to drum up more support for that pointless wall




#15
Quote by whywefight
look up duck dicks dude, they're fuckin insane

#16
 i had the idea of making the wall a really long gerbil wheel that would power flood lights along the border, but i never heard back from them. 
how many movements do you have going on, psychotic ?
#18
Quote by MinterMan22
I remember hearing something about how the production of solar panels is extremely damaging to the environment because of the things they need to mine to get em working


yeah right
#19
Quote by MinterMan22
I remember hearing something about how the production of solar panels is extremely damaging to the environment because of the things they need to mine to get em working

no idea if that's true or not but this is clearly just some dipshitted effort to drum up more support for that pointless wall

They are, same sort of bad stuff going into your phone and computers.
Also most of the panels are made in China and were sold in the US below cost to break the US solar market.

The things is, a lot of stuff is toxic but if you have controls in place they can be made safely and disposed safely.
No one here wants to pay for that, so they shop at Walmart where literally everything is toxic.
#20
Quote by 33db
They are, same sort of bad stuff going into your phone and computers.
Also most of the panels are made in China and were sold in the US below cost to break the US solar market.

The things is, a lot of stuff is toxic but if you have controls in place they can be made safely and disposed safely.
No one here wants to pay for that, so they shop at Walmart where literally everything is toxic.


You, MinterMan22 , and the other oil shills are a riot. Lithium extraction is not that hard on the environment compared to coal, and setting up panels hurts the land too much, as compared to what, not getting energy at all?

Please. Don't make me laugh. Your time is neigh, gas cucks.
#22
Fat Lard Lithium?? The vast majority of photovoltaic cells are silicon. And yeah, they are expensive and emission-laden to produce

We definitely need a new of doing it, because current technologies are basically stagnant with their efficiency, at an average of 25% and theoretical maximum of around 33% (although there's a lot of experimental/theoretical materials or technologies to boost the efficiency.)
My God, it's full of stars!
#23
That's silly, trump should do this instead


Quote by jrcsgtpeppers
There shall be a stop to this madness. The battle is not over. My tasty licks aren't going anywhere.

Quote by The_Blode
^ I've just realised if you say Simple Plan's 2011 effort "Get Your Heart On!" really fast in a Southern American accent, it sounds gross. . .like sexual gross!

Quote by Necroheadbanger
Hello.
I'm looking for professional bongo-ists and triangle-ists to make a Progressive Technical Brutal Death Metal band
(will be called AxOxJxLxAxIxVxXxUxWxZxQxUxRxWxGxJxSxAxLxKxMxNxHxUxGxAxAxWxVxCxBxZxVx)
(Don't even ask what it means)


https://soundcloud.com/95dank



#24
Dreadnought Woah, nice numbers and statistics! Please, bro. Even if the initial amount of environmental hurt was too much for you liberals, it's done after that initial investment, powered by the Sun. You know, that thing that produces abundantly free energy that we arent utilizing?

Also, lol at "not efficient". Google Tesla's batteries. Thry can store more than enough energy for all of your needs

Quote by k.lainad
That's silly, trump should do this instead




Straight out of Black Mirror. Damn...
#25
You know how I know you're a shill?

Quote by Fat Lard
Dreadnought Woah, nice numbers and statistics!


Thanks, they're useful in a thing called science

Please, bro. Even if the initial amount of environmental hurt was too much for you liberals,


who??

Yeah, why are you arbitrarily 'defending' against the current method of silicon photovoltaic cell production? There's nothing wrong with wanting more efficient, less energy-dependent methods of producing other energy-producing materials. That's just common sense. Would you have also defended 1930's era coal mining practices?

it's done after that initial investment, powered by the Sun. You know, that thing that produces abundantly free energy that we arent utilizing?


never heard of it, probably a cuck marginal """""news/truth"""""" rag that you shill for, drumpfer

Also, lol at "not efficient". Google Tesla's batteries. Thry can store more than enough energy for all of your needs


Get off your drugs, lardman, battery storage capability (which is also a good area where we could benefit substantially from technological improvement, to be honest) has nothing to do with energy conversion efficiency. Since you're a puppet shill, let me explain it again for you: current solar panel technologies are rather inefficient at converting solar energy to a usable form, at limits from the low 20's to low 30's percentages. We could benefit substantially from finding either more efficient materials or more efficient structures using those materials.

Really none of this requires your agreement or disagreement. Just take it in, nod, and smoke a bowl
My God, it's full of stars!
#26
He should build the wall out of Russian collusion because there's so much of it
#27
Quote by Dreadnought
You know how I know you're a shill?


Thanks, they're useful in a thing called science


who??

Yeah, why are you arbitrarily 'defending' against the current method of silicon photovoltaic cell production? There's nothing wrong with wanting more efficient, less energy-dependent methods of producing other energy-producing materials. That's just common sense. Would you have also defended 1930's era coal mining practices?


never heard of it, probably a cuck marginal """""news/truth"""""" rag that you shill for, drumpfer


Get off your drugs, lardman, battery storage capability (which is also a good area where we could benefit substantially from technological improvement, to be honest) has nothing to do with energy conversion efficiency. Since you're a puppet shill, let me explain it again for you: current solar panel technologies are rather inefficient at converting solar energy to a usable form, at limits from the low 20's to low 30's percentages. We could benefit substantially from finding either more efficient materials or more efficient structures using those materials.

Really none of this requires your agreement or disagreement. Just take it in, nod, and smoke a bowl


"Hey guys, it's not the most perfectly efficient medium for getting energy, even though it's super cheap to extract sun rays after the fact for future inflows, so we should just not do it."

How many oil-dollars do they pay you to make these hogwash posts?
#28
Quote by Fat Lard
"Hey guys, it's not the most perfectly efficient medium for getting energy, even though it's super cheap to extract sun rays after the fact for future inflows, so we should just not do it."

How many oil-dollars do they pay you to make these hogwash posts?


Not enough, because some idiot baking his brain in Florida thinks I said we shouldn't use solar panels when I said that we could benefit from better ones.
My God, it's full of stars!
#29
Quote by Dreadnought
Not enough, because some idiot baking his brain in Florida thinks I said we shouldn't use solar panels when I said that we could benefit from better ones.


Ad hominem is not proper form for debates. Looks like you lose again. Blocked
#30
You're so annoying lol
My God, it's full of stars!
#31
Quote by Fat Lard
Ad hominem is not proper form for debates. Looks like you lose again. Blocked

Got 'em
#33
I think in states like California, New Mexico and Arizona (and groan... Florida) solar cells on top of house should be mandatory, included in the price of the house.
Just think if every building in Cali had solar cells on top, it would drive some diversity in color choices, lower emissions, provide jobs, etc.

Maybe every state should do it, but start in the sunny ones.
#34
I still haven't seen one real argument against The Electric Solar Wall. Even if it's not the most efficient means of energy production, it's a revenue-producing part of infrastructure that we could sell to Mexico to help them with their power needs. I know Mike "One Watt for Every Impure Thought" Pence has got our backs on this one. It's literally a thing everyone can agree on
#37
Quote by Fat Lard
I still haven't seen one real argument against The Electric Solar Wall. Even if it's not the most efficient means of energy production, it's a revenue-producing part of infrastructure that we could sell to Mexico to help them with their power needs. I know Mike "One Watt for Every Impure Thought" Pence has got our backs on this one. It's literally a thing everyone can agree on

The same arguments that applied to the non-solar wall still apply, and they're reason enough to to build the wall, unless you're a lunatic or own a construction company in New Mexico that specialises in really long fences.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#38
Quote by slapsymcdougal
The same arguments that applied to the non-solar wall still apply, and they're reason enough to to build the wall, unless you're a lunatic or own a construction company in New Mexico that specialises in really long fences.


The only arguments against the wall are, 1) it's cost ineffective, and 2) it hurts my feefees. Now that Trump and friends have a way to bypass Congress on the wall issue (since anything that costs real $ and requires gov't finance goes through the House Ways & Means Committee and Senate Finance one, etc), by making public-private contracts for the future revenue this will lead to us, it's literally a go.

Seriously, if you're against this, you're against sustainable, clean, renewable energy. End of story.
#39
Quote by Fat Lard
The only arguments against the wall are, 1) it's cost ineffective, and 2) it hurts my feefees. Now that Trump and friends have a way to bypass Congress on the wall issue (since anything that costs real $ and requires gov't finance goes through the House Ways & Means Committee and Senate Finance one, etc), by making public-private contracts for the future revenue this will lead to us, it's literally a go.

Seriously, if you're against this, you're against sustainable, clean, renewable energy. End of story.

You're suggesting that it's somehow less efficient to erect the same area of solar cells in a farm than along a border fence?



This guy not only thinks you're a dill-hole, his maths back him up.
Quote by Diemon Dave
Don't go ninjerin nobody don't need ninjerin'
#40
Quote by slapsymcdougal
You're suggesting that it's somehow less efficient to erect the same area of solar cells in a farm than along a border fence?



This guy not only thinks you're a dill-hole, his maths back him up.


"Hey guys, this fat british guy from the 1800's says that utilizing large amounts of solar area at the most possibly nearest to the equator rather than taking up the opportunity costs by utilizing farm land for other things is a bad idea, because maths! I love science, and I think the word math is plural!"

Nice argument. (Just kidding).
Page 1 of 4