• ShellMonkey@piefed.socdojo.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    2 days ago

    Some of these policies are just plain ‘fuck you I’m doing this just to piss people off’. There’s no logic involved at all.

  • Asafum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    2 days ago

    So naturally the question becomes what coal billionaire prick is paying Trump or his family for this?

    • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      18 hours ago

      “In addition, Trump will receive the inaugural ““Undisputed Champion of Coal”” award on Wednesday from the Washington Coal Club, a pro-coal group with ties to the fossil fuel industry…”

    • Mirshe@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Very few, I’d imagine. At best, this is propping up failing parts of their empire - a lot of mining companies have switched to something easier than coal because coal is getting harder to mine, and a lot of energy companies are diversifying because of the slowdown of effective mining. This seems to simply be “because I can”.

    • Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Hell, military has easier access to fuckin’ nuclear power if they wanted it. Any source of power is at their disposal, and they choose coal, a shitty messy rock that burns?

    • stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      Because anti-woke pandering.


      That and also pandering to coal miners.


      Here is my suggestion instead.

      Stop using coal for pure power, it is way better used in heritage steam locomotives and steelmaking.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Stop using coal for pure power, it is way better used in heritage steam locomotives and steelmaking

        Fixed it for you. There’s no necessary use for burning coal that doesn’t have a better alternative.

        • stoy@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Steam locomotives does not have a better alternative, it is part of the historical experience.

          There are also relatively few steam locomotives in use world wide, their impact is quite limited.

          Also to make carbon steel, you need to use coal.

          • abbadon420@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            You can make steel with water. As far as I know, that process is still not economically viable (too expensive), but it will never be if we don’t fund it. Solar energy used to be expensive as well.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            Steam locomotives does not have a better alternative, it is part of the historical experience.

            That’s just not true

            There are also relatively few steam locomotives in use world wide, their impact is quite limited.

            That also makes it easier to replace the fuel in all of them.

            Also to make carbon steel, you need to use coal.

            Sure, to make CARBON steel, you obviously need carbon. However, you do NOT need to make carbon steel since alternatives DO exist.

            TL; DR: Your “coal is necessary for anything” conclusion is decades behind modern technology.

            You should probably get with the times, lest you become a fossil yourself 😉

            • xade@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 day ago

              Carbon steel is very much needed in a lot of places. It is harder than mild steel and is used in axles, gears, cutting tools etc.

              SSAB HYBRIT technology replaces the usage of coal/coke in the iron reduction stage with hydrogen which is nice since it only produces water and not CO2. But I can’t find any information regarding the carbon content of the resulting sponge iron. If the carbon content is too low you still need to add elemental carbon in some form.

              Edit: https://www.hybritdevelopment.se/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/hybrit-broschure-fossil-free-steel-production-ready-for-industrialisation.pdf

              Found all the answers I was looking for. :)

              The resulting sponge iron is 0% carbon meaning you need to add carbon in some form. The broschure mentions the use of either biocarbon or a small amount of natural gas. So no need for coal. Neat. :)

            • stoy@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              I would need to smell the smoke from the biofueled steam locomotives to determine if it is better or not.

              Regarding carbon steel, I am a Swede, I have seen the (quite sexy) ads for carbonfree steel, that is super cool and if it becomes a viable alternative to actual carbon steel, I am all for it.

  • tidderuuf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 days ago

    “Why do we even have nuculer aircraft carriers. We need coal powered. They are much stronger. You ever see those guys down below shoveling the coal. They are strong.” -Trump probably

  • discocactus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    2 days ago

    I mean it’s at this point obvious that he’s trying to destroy the US. If he manages to damage the MIC I guess that’s a silver lining… But at what cost…