Post

Burgum: "CO2 was never a pollutant. When we breathe, we emit CO2. Plants need CO2 to survive and grow. They thrive with more CO2. So the whole endangerment thing opens up an opportunity for the revival of clean, beautiful, American coal."

307 reposts1.4K likes

Shit's rough in the UK, but I feel for our Transatlantic cousins. A great country brought to its knees, solely for the further enrichment of Donald Trump, his awful family and all his pedophile chums.

Arguing over whether it's a "pollutant" or not misses the point. That is only relevant if you want to regulate it using existing laws that were written before we understood the damage it can cause when levels get too high.

But as we continue to deforest and remove green spaces those plants that need our CO2 can't absorb enough of it. How many humans breathing naturally does it take to equal the emissions produced by one coal burning plant? CO2 was never a pollutant? Stupid.

Here we go with billionaires bitching about those pesky regulations again. Their profits mean more than public health or safety. They'd gladly gut the Earth for another dollar. #FuckTheGOP

I don't honestly think there is any chance of redemption for the GOP.It appears that they support virtually everything that the rest of the sane world has moved on from.

This guy is smart enough to know that what he is saying is nonsense, but it is only performative for the MAGA crowd as they will believe anything their leaders will say.

That old chestnut is so stupid and wrong how can anyone repeat it with a straight face? There is no such thing as clean coal unless you want to pay 3 or 4 times more for electricity. And natural gas is cheaper than dirty (but less dirty than years ago) coal, and is inherently cleaner burning.

The industial revolution started in England with water power, then with coal burning steam engines. Then coal generated electicity. Decades ago the whole place actually smelled like coal. The last deep coal mine in the UK closed about a decade ago, and the last strip mine a couple years ago.

His view is insane in at least 4 ways. 1) Coal extraction directly harms the environment and endangers workers. 2) CO2 causes global warming. 3) Burning coal causes air pollution, e.g. particulates. 4) Coal is one of, if not the most expensive forms of energy. He literally could not be more wrong!

"Water is not a danger. We need water to live and thrive. All this talk about floods killing people, and rising sea levels inundating coastal cities, it's all really just an opportunity for more thriving."

"CO2 was never a pollutant. When we breathe, we emit CO2. Plants need CO2 to survive and grow." Guess Burgum believes human life is not worth more than a plant. It's these kind of idiots ppl elect to make laws for all US? Humans can't survive of CO2, does he think Apollo 13 was fake?

In fairness, Burgum was probably dropped on his head as a child … repeatedly. Seriously - this is like arguing that hurricanes aren’t bad, because we need water to live.

And what other pollutants You know some of these former governors need to be disallowed to be in conveying clodhopper comments They figured they hooked themselves into DJT goon that will allow them to enjoy more stomp power Every generation becomes smarter & figure out the past goons to avoid

Dragging us backwards every fucking day. The world advances and the stupid old men leading this shitshow want it to be 1950. Or 1850 depending on the topic at hand.

Yes, we EMIT CO2 when we exhale --- it is a WASTE PRODUCT of human respiration. So it is obviously BAD for humans to have MORE CO2 in the air they breathe. It's like arguing that it's not a problem to have more shit on the table at restaurants.

I once dared one of these "CO2 is a natural waste product" schlubs to name me one other waste product I was supposed to be keen to take back into my body by the same route it left. He failed. (Laughed, but failed.)

Ah, the good old home skoolin’ kicking in there… I’ll bet they’ll find a passage in their bible that supports their argument.

Doug Burgum knows he's lying but his calculus is I'm so rich no matter what happens as a result of climate change I will be dead long before the major effects occur and my family will have generational wealth to be able to live where it is safe to live and will not be majorly impacted

Just when you think they couldn't say anything more ignorant, they spring this whopper on us. And you know that the brain dead maga all agree and applaud this imbeciles statement. FYI, we DO NOT breathe out 100% CO² ! 🙄

They aren’t stupid, they’re greedy. They know it’s fucking the planet and they know they won’t live long enough for it to be their problem. We shouldn’t excuse selfishness masquerading as stupidity.

I keep wondering if these people have grandchildren. The grandchildren will grow up to recognize the gaslighting, and their future will be harmed, and they will be angry and ashamed. Don’t these people have one drop of humanity in them? Apparently not.

It’s a consequence of unregulated out of control capitalism. They’re fine destroying the entire planet if they get 4 more quarters of growth and record profits. They’ll cut down Sequoia National Park just to save on lumber costs. Nothing is sacred. Profit is all that matters.

Look, I'd love for them to stop prioritizing profits over everything, but in lieu of that can they at least move on from the dumbest takes and put just a little more effort into their grift beyond "trees need CO2" "winter means no global warming"? 🙄

Look it up Burgham: While CO2 is natural and necessary in small amounts, the excess amount produced by human industry fits the definition of a global, long-term environmental pollutant because it causes systemic damage to the environment and human welfare.

Put him in a sealed lucite box with pure CO2 to breathe. Hell, put him in a sealed lucite box with pure O2 to breathe.

We should make people who say this our "climate ambassadors". Whenever an inhabited island goes under, we send them there to explain to the natives that water is a harmless natural compound essential for life.

I think it's a mental shortcut. People who vote the way these scumbags like, don't like to think about their actions having consequences. This gives them a one-line answer to repeat to themselves to assuage their guilt. Shen Bapiro is the poster boy for this sort of thing.

They fiercely believe it, and if you dare question their faith, they'll lash out like any hardcore cultist if you dare to question their leader/doctrine.

Yes - the "CO2 - It's what plants crave! They'll grow better!" argument's been around for a few decades, has some selling power, and has also been demonstrated to be actually wrong.

It's not about belief, it's about loyalty. Their followers need the lies to distinguish the loyal from the disloyal. The more egregious the lie, the more loyalty you can show by buying into it.

1, I suspect insiders bought coal futures a few days ago and will probably dump them as soon as the market settles down. 2, Burning coal releases more than carbon dioxide: methane and nitrogen oxides, all contribute to heat trapping climate pollution. 3, Coal contains toxic metals, e.g., mercury.

Not to mention the vast plant life of the ocean (phytoplankton) which produce 50-80% of our oxygen, so if burning coal and polluting the oceans seems like a plan then the entire planet's life will be extinct eventually.

If the oxygen level on earth got to 25%, everything would catch fire. If it got to 16%, we would all die. Dunning Kreuger is really having a moment here.

They really think they have the power to just blatantly deny science itself at this point like they do the rule of law. Because the "whole endangerment thing" for us is what fascism is all about. bsky.app/profile/atru...

Aaron Rupar@atrupar.com

Burgum: "CO2 was never a pollutant. When we breathe, we emit CO2. Plants need CO2 to survive and grow. They thrive with more CO2. So the whole endangerment thing opens up an opportunity for the revival of clean, beautiful, American coal."

IIRC, plants indeed grew faster around CO2. However, crops had less nutrients so it wasn't worth it. The theory was plants worked harder with less CO2 around, had to pull more stuff from the soil.

So how many more billions of acres of forests are they planning on planting to suck up all the CO2 plants crave? Oh, they are also trying to sell off our national parks too...

🇨🇦🇺🇦🙄JFC, does Burgum even know that he doesn’t just sound as dumb as a rock to Americans but the rest of the world as well? You know these Trump thuds could not have possibly made their billions off of their brains, but instead corruption all along.