How wealthy blue staters fight #ClimateChange

We have had four separate articles in our series “How wealthy New Englanders fight #ClimateChange,” noting how our blue state brethren, the ones who gave so many of their votes to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris Emhoff in the 2020 election. We take the assumption that those who voted for the Democrats agreed at least in part with the Democrats’ plans on fighting global warming climate change, and looked at how New Englanders with money, at least enough money to afford a major remodeling job featured on the long running PBS series This Old House.

In season 46, the program selected a project house in Ridgewood, New Jersey, not New England, but still among the bluest of blue states. In the 2020 election, Garden State voters gave 2,608,400 votes, 57.33%, to former Vice President Biden and Senator Emhoff, and 1,883,313 votes, only 41.40%, to President Donald trump and Vice President Mike Pence. Thats a landslide margin. Four years later, the election was closer in New Jersey, but Vice President Emhoff and her running mate, Governor Tim Walz, received 2,220,713 votes, 51.97%, to 1,968,215, 46.06% for former President Trump and Senator J D Vance. While closer, the outcome in the state was never in doubt.

Bergen County, a sort-of suburb of New York City, was carried by the Democrats, 232,660, 50.68%, to 217,096, 47.29%.

So, how did the wealthy couple from Ridgewood heat their home?

In the basement, Richard Trethewey meets with plumbing and heating expert Kordian Rak, who explains the benefits of the home’s new combination boiler, capable of powering both the radiator heating and water heating systems. Together, they review the new piping system that runs from the basement to the attic and back, including a specialized setup that generates heat beneath the new kitchen floor slab.

It’s a brand new, very efficient boiler, and it’s a natural gas boiler. An original fireplace from the 1920s was retained. The kitchen range is not mentioned, but it is electric, where their older range was gas.

The Garden State does not have any mandate to ban gas heating in new construction, and even if such existed, this was a remodel, not a new build, so a gas heating system would have been grandfathered. But an extensive remodel, in a home in which the old gas-fired boiler had just failed, could have gone with an all-electric heating plan, but did not. If solar panels were to be added to this home, they were never mentioned.

As I write this, it is 17.2º F outside, and we’re in the early stages of the dreaded Snowpocalypse. It started snowing five hours ago, but there’s still only ¾ inch of snow on the ground. Our propane fireplace has occasionally supplemented our heat pump based HVAC system, to keep the house nice and warm. I can see how people in further north than me would want a steadier, more reliable gas heating system, but in very blue state New Jersey?

Well, who knows? Perhaps the homeowners were among the 47.29% of Bergen Countians who cast their votes more sensibly that the majority of residents in the state.

Ford CEO Jim Farley whines that government isn’t forcing people to buy electric vehicles

I’m starting to worry that I’m poaching too much on William Teach’s themes, with two previous articles in a week about plug in electric vehicles, but I spotted the following story this morning in the Lexington Herald-Leader:

Ford CEO Jim Farley shares ‘shocking’ lesson he learned from Tesla

By Tony Owusu, TheStreet | Thursday, November 12, 2025 | 9:38 AM EST

Earlier this year, Ford CEO Jim Farley had a humbling experience in Asia.

The Detroit automaker has sunk billions into Model e, its electric vehicle division, for decades, with little to show for it.

In June, he told author Walter Isaacson during a panel at the Aspen Ideas Festival that he made as many as seven trips to China over the past year.

“It’s the most humbling thing I have ever seen. Seventy percent of all EVs in the world, electric vehicles, are made in China,” Farley said. “They have far superior in-vehicle technology. Huawei and Xiaomi are in every car. You get in, you don’t have to pair your phone. Automatically, your whole digital life is mirrored in the car.”

Uhhh, maybe some of us would not see that as a great feature. A lot of people — I am not one of them — have their financial records on their phones, and pay some things with their too-smart phones. Perhaps some people wouldn’t want their cars to automatically “pair” with their phones, especially if it gives the car, and who knows how many other people, access to their lives and finances. With an estimated net worth of $72.9 million, perhaps Mr Farley is excited by every new gadget out there, and isn’t too terribly worried if someone pays for their Door Dash through Mr Farley’s accounts, but some of us poorer people do have to keep an eye on things.

The story continues to note how the CEO was impressed by superior technology and engineering, saying that Ford has to step up to compete, but then comes the money lines:

While Farley didn’t speak much about the builds of Ford’s Chinese rivals, he did praise the government for promoting the EV industry in a way the U.S. does not.

Farley said that “EVs are exploding in China” because the government there has put its “foot on the economic scale.”

In a Communist command economy, the government can put its “foot on the economic scale.” In a (mostly) free market in the United States, while there was some, thankfully expired, foot pushing in the form of government tax credits for buying electric vehicles and some states mandating that a certain percentage of new cars be EVs by 2030 to 2035, Americans exercising their free choices have not been so compliant. Toyota listened to what consumers wanted, and has focused on hybrids instead.

Perhaps it’s time that Mr Farley dumped his prejudices in favor of electric vehicles, and took a cold, hard look at what a free people taking free choices actually want.

Amazing what can happen when manufacturers listen to what consumers want Electric cars nope; hybrids yup!

This site noted, just five days ago, that Ford Motor Company was considering doing away with its all-electric F-150 Lightning line of trucks, because the buyer demand for the vehicles just wasn’t there. Now there’s this, from The Wall Street Journal:

Toyota Doubles Down on Hybrids in the U.S. With $14-Billion Battery Push

New North Carolina plant is aimed at selling more hybrid cars and trucks to Americans

By Christopher Otts | Wednesday, November 12, 2025 | 1:28 PM EST

LIBERTY, N.C.—Toyota, a longtime hybrid car and truck promoter, is making one of the industry’s biggest bets on green transportation and opening a $14 billion battery plant here.

For years, Toyota held out against electric vehicles while rivals retrofitted factories and launched models in preparation for an all-electric future. Now that the EV market in the U.S. is vanishing as tax credits expire and sales disappoint, Toyota is doubling down on its hybrid strategy.

The Japanese automaker’s gamble: that American consumers—many of whom won’t touch an EV—will buy increasing numbers of hybrids, which often get up to 50% better mileage than a standard gas-powered car.

Toyota also said it would invest up to $10 billion in U.S. manufacturing over the next five years in addition to the North Carolina site, where it made the largest investment in a U.S. battery-production site.

The batteries that Toyota has begun making at the sprawling plant, located between the cities of Greensboro and Raleigh, are going into hybrids assembled in Kentucky and Alabama. The complex is designed to make batteries for EVs and hybrids, including those that plug in and travel short distances on just electricity before switching to gas.

Our family are familiar with hybrids, as our older daughter had a 2017 Toyota Prius Hybrid, and now drives a 2024 Prius Hybrid. It’s a good, solid vehicle, and she put a ton of miles on her first hybrid, as her civilian job took her on frequent trips throughout the eastern half of the country. She put nearly 200,000 miles on it, before trading it in.

The reason she traded it in was, of course, the battery. It was beginning to fail, and Toyota wanted $8000 to change it. That has always been the problem with the hybrids, and it’s something Toyota, and other hybrid manufacturers, need to address. I’d bet 25€ that all Toyota did was spend less than $2000 to swap out the battery to sell it used.

“For the longest time, folks were criticizing Toyota that they were so slow to the game in the battery-electric business,” said Charlie Chesbrough, senior economist at Cox Automotive. But the strategy worked, he said. “They really did focus on the traditional hybrids, and they are dominating that whole product segment.”

In other words, Toyota’s leadership were smart enough not to listen to Joe Biden and the Democrats, who were pushing a technology and infrastructure that was simply not ready.

Toyota did listen, however, to consumers, to new automobile buyers, and the company’s actions reflect the free market, and the choices people take in a free country.

Ford might trash the entire F-150 Lightning electric vehicle model line

It seems that the electric vehicle mandates of the Biden Administration were not greeted with approval by the public, and the public are not choosing to buy the silly things without Federal government bribery. From The Wall Street Journal:

Ford Considers Scrapping Electric Version of F-150 Truck

Once hyped as a ‘smartphone that can tow,’ production of the money-losing EV pickup may be shut down for good

2022 F-150 charging in a lot nicer garage than I have. It shows you just how much money you have to have to buy one of the fool things. Photo from a Ford sales site. Click to enlarge.


By Sharon Terlep | Thursday, November 6, 2025 | 4:06 PM EST

Ford Motor executives are in active discussions about scrapping the electric version of its F-150 pickup, according to people familiar with the matter, which would make the money-losing truck America’s first major EV casualty.

The Lightning, once described by Ford as a modern Model T for its importance to the company, fell far short of expectations as American truck buyers skipped the electric version of the top-selling truck. Ford has racked up $13 billion in EV losses since 2023.

Overall EV sales, already falling short of expectations, are expected to plummet in the absence of government support. And big, electric pickups and SUVs are the most vulnerable.

If you are blocked by the Journal’s paywall, you can read more about it in The Detroit News.

“The demand is just not there” for F-150 Lightning and other full-size trucks, said Adam Kraushaar, owner of Lester Glenn Auto Group in New Jersey. He sells Ford, GMC, Chevy and other brands. “We don’t order a lot of them because we don’t sell them.”

No final decision has yet been made, according to people familiar with the discussions, but such a move by Ford could be the beginning of the end for big EV trucks.

Using the back of my truck as a workbench. Would I ever do this with a $70,000+ truck?

The decision has been taken, taken already, but not by Ford executives; the decision was taken by the men who buy trucks!

I actually could do OK with an F-150 Lightning. I’m retired, and live and work on a small farm. My average mileage has greatly decreased since retirement, and I have a full shop, with 200 amp separate electric service, in which I could easily mount a vehicle charger. I ought to be the ideal customer, but I would never, ever buy that overpriced piece of [insert vulgar slang for feces here].

I already own an F-150, a 2010, which does just fine. It’s kind of beat up looking, because it’s actually a work truck, and it has some obvious rust thanks to Pennsylvania winters and road salt. Why would I throw away my money on a shiny, new truck at which I would be appalled to throw wood or brush or lumber in the back? The Lightning would be fine for people who haul nothing but groceries and beer, but for men who buy trucks because they use trucks for work, nope, sorry, wrong answer.

Ram truck-maker Stellantis earlier this year called off plans to make an electric version of its full-size pickup. General Motors executives have discussed discontinuing some electric trucks, according to people familiar with the matter. Sales of Tesla’s angular, stainless steel Cybertruck pickup tanked this year. And EV truck-maker Rivian has been cutting jobs to conserve cash.

Here’s the real kicker:

Ford already paused production of its F-150 Lightning—the bestselling electric pickup in the U.S.—last month amid an aluminum shortage. The company is weighing whether to keep that plant idle as it shifts to smaller, more affordable EVs, the people say. The company said it would restart production “at the right time.”

In October, the first month since the end of the federal EV tax credit, Ford’s overall EV sales in the U.S. fell 24% from a year earlier. Ford dealers sold 66,000 gas-powered F-Series pickups, up a tick from a year earlier, and just 1,500 Lightnings, the fewest of any model.

Translation: even the people who did buy them were influenced by the bribes offered by the federal government. Every American taxpayer was being charged a little bit to provide some welfare for the well-to-do, the only people who could afford to buy brand new F-150s.

We’ve seen this before. In April of 2010, when I bought my current vehicle, the Feds were offering the so-called “cash for clunkers” program. The 2000 F-150 I traded in, at, if I remember correctly, 189,000 miles, qualified for the first part, but the new F-150 didn’t for the second. Yeah, I was able to afford to buy a new vehicle, but the new vehicle I needed got less than necessary miles per gallon rating. Cash for clunkers was yet another bit of welfare for the well-to-do, a program which was supposed to aid in recession recovery, but in 2010, the only people who could afford to buy new vehicles didn’t need the government assistance.

So, without a government program bribing people to buy electric vehicles, and without the federal government mandate requiring a certain percentage of new vehicles sold to be EVs, the public are simply not buying EVs at a rate which can sustain production of them.

Remember one thing: the left are pro-choice on exactly one thing!

Surprise: Fossil Fuels Hating PRC Trying To Keep Fossil Fuels Companies From Leaving

Here’s from October 2024

Why Oil Companies Are Leaving California

On October 16, 2024, the refiner Phillips 66 announced that it will cease operations at its Los Angeles-area refinery in the fourth quarter of 2025. This announcement came a few days after California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a new law placing additional regulations on refineries.

The closure will affect approximately 600 employees and 300 contractors that currently work at the Los Angeles-area refinery. Politico reported that this closure would also impact 8% of the state’s already tight gasoline production.

Although Phillips 66 spokesperson Al Ortiz denied in an email to Politico that the closure was a response to Newsom’s signing the new law, California’s treatment of its oil industry has undoubtedly been a factor.

The news follows an announcement in August 2024 that Chevron, the second-largest U.S. oil company, will relocate from its California headquarters to Texas. The company, with roots in California dating back to 1879, will transition its headquarters to Houston over the next five years.

Chevron’s move comes as a response to California’s stringent regulations and aggressive climate policies. Chevron’s CEO, Mike Wirth, expressed concerns about the state’s business environment in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

I still maintain the companies should stop selling their products to the state government of the People’s Republic Of California. Stopping operations in the PRC will increase the cost of energy in the state, and moving operations to other states will deny a lot of tax money. Anyhow, now

California trying to keep oil and gas firms from leaving the state

Following 25 years of what oil and gas executives categorize as hostility to the industry, the state is now making a play to keep those companies from leaving.

Concerned with the exodus of oil and gas companies, refinery closures and the expensive price of gasoline in the state, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed legislation last week that fast tracks the approval of 2,000 new wells per year over the next 10 years in Kern County, a significant oil-producing region.

But, will the companies actually want to develop those wells, wondering when the other shoe in the PRC will drop, having watched the Democrat operate the past 25 years? Particularly since there are still lawsuits from cities and counties in the PRC? Will they take the chance?

NY Times: US Isolation On Display During UN Climate Week Or Something

Weirdly, the Paper Of Record forgot to mention all the long fossil fueled trip, mostly on private jets, world leaders took to NYC

At Global Climate Summit This Week, U.S. Isolation Was on Full Display

At a climate summit at the United Nations on Wednesday, the vast majority of the world’s nations gathered to make their newest pledges to reduce planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions over the next decade.

Geopolitical heavyweights including China, Russia, Japan and Germany were there. Dozens of small island states were there. The world’s poorest countries, including Chad and the Central African Republic, were there. Venezuela, Syria, Iran — there, too.

The United States was not.

There are few issues on which the United States is more diplomatically isolated from the rest of the world than climate change. President Trump’s hostility to renewable energy, which he clearly broadcast in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly, is at odds with the rapid construction of wind farms, solar arrays and other renewable energy sources in a range of countries. The construction boom includes even oil-producing giants like Saudi Arabia, which is adding solar capacity at a rapid clip.

Do we care? Does Trump care? If the other nations want to mortgage their future on this scam, have at it. If the Elites in other countries want to use this to initiate authoritarianism, real, that’s on them. None of those Elites at the UN nor their staffs are practicing what they preach.

At Wednesday’s climate summit, 121 countries were scheduled to deliver a message very different from Mr. Trump’s, pledging to rein in global emissions not only for the sake of trying to slow catastrophic global warming but because renewables are getting cheaper faster than was previously thought. In some cases, renewables now produce electricity more affordably than plants that burn fossil fuels, bolstering the argument made by some countries that solar and wind can help with economic growth while providing energy security by limiting reliance on imports of fuels like coal, oil or gas.

Can they start by making their leaders take trains and sailing ships back to their home companies?

“Day-Zero Droughts” Coming Soon Or Something

I mean, I’m seriously impressed, the doomsday cult has really been working on coming up with new stuff instead of recycling the same old stuff

Where ‘day-zero droughts’ could happen as soon as this decade

Many parts of the world are predicted to endure “day-zero droughts,” periods of extreme and unprecedented water scarcity, which could happen as soon as this decade in certain hotspots including parts of North America, the Mediterranean and southern Africa, according to a new study.

It’s well known that climate change, driven by burning fossil fuels, is throwing the global water cycle off balance and causing scarcity. What’s much less clear is when and where extreme water shortages will hit. The new research helps provide answers and some of them are surprising, said Christian Franzke, a climate scientist at Pusan National University in South Korea and an author of the study published Tuesday in Nature Communications.

The scientists used a large number of climate models to assess the timing and likelihood of day-zero droughts. These are “unprecedented water scarcity events, events which haven’t occurred so far,” Franzke said. It’s when “you turn on your water tap and no water comes out,” he told CNN.

Day-zero droughts arise from the confluence of various factors, including a prolonged dearth of rain, low river levels and shrunken reservoirs, as well as rocketing water demand to supply people, farms and industries.

Computer models, LOL. They tell the doomsday scientists whatever they want. Anyhow, what happens if this doesn’t happen? Who loses their job, pension, and reputation?

More than a third of these regions, including the western United States, could face this situation as early as the 2020s or 2030s. The finding that day-zero droughts could happen so soon, at current levels of global warming, was “something that surprised us,” Franzke said, even though a few cities have already come perilously close.

Oh, right, no one will remember this particular bit of scaremongering, it’s meant for now, to freak people out and get politicians to pass laws. But, I think people are mostly done being scared. I’ve always watched a ton of horror movies since I was young and read horror books. There’s little that scares me anymore.

NY Times Talks To Six World Leaders On ‘Climate Change’

I hope it was by Zoom

Six World Leaders on Navigating Climate Change, Without the U.S.

International collaboration on climate change is fraying. The Trump administration withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, the 2015 treaty aiming to limit global warming, and has penalized the renewable-energy business and promoted fossil fuels. Ten years after Paris, a vast majority of countries are not on pace to meet their climate targets. With the United States sidelined and China ascendant as a clean-energy superpower, the global map of alliances on climate action is being redrawn. On top of all this, the planet keeps warming.

Debates around climate change often focus on the world’s largest economies and biggest emitters. But much of the hard work of figuring out how to adapt — both to a hotter planet and to a new geopolitical landscape — is happening in countries that have contributed relatively little to the problem yet are still navigating complex climate-related issues. Hoping to better understand how global warming and the changing world order are affecting some of these often-overlooked places, I spoke with six world leaders from different geographic regions. I heard some common themes: the ravages of extreme weather, the difficulties posed by the Trump administration’s retreat. But these conversations also illustrated the intensely varied predicaments facing world leaders right now.

They talk to

  • Hilda C. Heine, president of the Marshall Islands, who says ‘We will be submerged by 2050 if the world doesn’t do its part.’
  • Anthony Albanese, prime minister of Australia
  • Mohamed Irfaan Ali, president of Guyana, who says ‘We can’t be naïve. The world will need fossil fuel a long time into the future.’
  • William Ruto, president of Kenya who said ‘When it comes to emissions, we are paying for a crime that others committed.’
  • Muhammad Yunus, chief adviser of Bangladesh
  • Petteri Orpo, prime minister of Finland who said ‘We are going to change our whole society.’

Orpo’s full quote

Today we produce more than 95 percent of our electricity carbon-neutral. We are going to change our whole society to use clean energy and get rid of fossils and to be carbon neutral. And we can do it. Our companies are committed. And our people, the whole of society, is committed to these targets.

You will change whether you like it or not. Oh, also the NY Times

It’s Gridlock Week in Manhattan as U.N. General Assembly Starts

It’s that time of year when Midtown East in Manhattan both brims with action and comes to a standstill.

The 80th session of the United Nations General Assembly, starting Monday, will bring together more than 140 world leaders to discuss contentious issues like the war in Ukraine and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. It is known by many diplomats as the World Cup of diplomacy.

But it is known by many New Yorkers as a pain in the neck.

The main event, which takes place this week along First Avenue between East 42nd and 48th Streets, brings with it impassable streets in Midtown East as well as intermittent closures citywide. The Department of Transportation is encouraging New Yorkers to use public transit and other “nondriving modes” for getting around Midtown over the next five days.

They want New Yorkers to take mass transit while the all the big shots, including the 6 mentioned above, take fossil fueled trips in big SUVs, along with their whole retinues. Climate doom is for you peasants.

Your Fault: Hotcoldwetdry Is Damaging Your Skin

The cult is really looking for things to fearmonger over (the question mark in the headline is not mine. Not sure why it is there)

How Climate Change Is Quietly Damaging Your Skin?

When we think about climate change, images of melting ice caps, rising sea levels, and extreme weather often come to mind. But there’s a more personal—and often overlooked—dimension to this global issue: your skin. Yes, the largest organ of your body is silently bearing the brunt of a changing climate. From increased UV radiation to humidity fluctuations, climate change is influencing skin health in subtle but significant ways.

Global temperatures have steadily climbed over the past century, and with them, heat-related skin issues are on the rise. Prolonged exposure to higher temperatures can exacerbate conditions like:

  • Heat rashes and hives: Sweat ducts can become blocked, leading to irritation and inflammation.
  • Rosacea and eczema: These conditions are often aggravated by environmental stressors like heat and pollution.
  • Acne flare-ups: Increased sweating can clog pores and worsen breakouts, especially in humid climates.

Yes, you’re sweating because of 1.7F increase in global temperatures since 1850. You can really notice.

As the ozone layer thins, more ultraviolet (UV) rays are reaching the Earth’s surface. This intensification of UV exposure accelerates:

  • Skin aging: UV radiation breaks down collagen, leading to premature wrinkles, sunspots, and loss of elasticity.
  • Skin cancer: Higher UV exposure increases the risk of all forms of skin cancer, including melanoma, one of the deadliest types.
  • Photosensitivity: Certain medications and skincare products may make the skin more sensitive to sunlight, compounding the risks.

Other People driving fossil fueled vehicles is really messing you up, right? Not you, of course. Your use of autos is just fine. Anyhow, more blamestorming, ending with

What You Can Do: Protecting Your Skin in a Changing Climate

Despite the looming threats, you’re not powerless. Here’s how to keep your skin resilient:

  • Use broad-spectrum SPF every day, even when it’s cloudy. Reapply every 2 hours if you’re outside.
  • Cleanse thoroughly to remove pollutants and dirt, especially if you live in an urban area.
  • Hydrate and moisturize to maintain a strong skin barrier—look for products with ceramides, hyaluronic acid, and niacinamide.
  • Wear protective clothing like wide-brimmed hats and UV-blocking sunglasses.
  • Invest in air purifiers if you’re in a high-pollution area or wildfire zone.
  • Consult a dermatologist if you notice unusual changes in your skin or if you suffer from chronic skin issues.

These are literally things you should do anyhow, and have nothing to do with ‘climate change’….oh, right, the cult thinks everything is part of their cult.