Climate Clown Arnold Schwarzenegger Mocks President Trump’s Support for Coal

Schwarzenegger being forced to drive a gas guzzling Hummer by “big oil”. Does this make him an accessory to first degree murder?

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Humvee fan Arnold Schwarzenegger demonstrating his profound ignorance of climate issues.

Arnold Schwarzenegger mocks Trump on coal, asks if he’ll bring back Blockbuster next

By Saba Hamedy, CNN
Updated 0617 GMT (1417 HKT) June 29, 2018

“The Terminator” has a message for President Donald Trump: Don’t go back in time to “rescue the coal industry.”

In a video uploaded to Facebook by media company ATTN: on Thursday, former California Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger references a popular movie role he played to mock what he describes as efforts to “save an industry that is poisoning the environment.”

“So President Trump, I know you really want to be an action hero, right?”

Schwarzenegger says, while looking at a Trump bobblehead. “So take it from the Terminator, you’re only supposed to go back in time to protect future generations. But your administration attempts to go back in time to rescue the coal industry, which is actually a threat to future generations.”

He then compares Trump’s attempt to “rescue the coal industry” to rescuing other relics from America’s past.

It is foolish to bring back laughable, outdated technology to suit your political agenda,” Schwarzenegger says. “I mean, what are you going to bring back next? Floppy disks? Fax machines? Beanie Babies? Beepers? Or Blockbuster? Think about it. What if you tried to save Blockbuster?”

Read more:

Arnie’s video rant;


Schwarzenegger seems to think the President is forcing people to use coal. Arnie thinks the USA should be investing in gas, wind, solar and geothermal energy.

As far as I know President Trump is not forcing anyone to use coal.

According to an internal White House memo obtained by Bloomberg a few weeks ago, President Trump explored providing support for energy suppliers who kept three months reserve fuel supply onsite, to protect grid resilience.

As far as I know this offer would in principle have been available for renewable energy suppliers who could demonstrate their ability to provide three months battery backup for their nameplate generation capacity. Of course, in the real world most renewable providers can’t promise a stable power supply for three minutes into the future, let alone three months.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
July 1, 2018 3:31 am
July 1, 2018 3:32 am

“Electric car buyers claim they were misled by Nissan”

Reply to  mwhite
July 1, 2018 4:28 am

Speaking of electric cars and hybrids. I wonder if the current administration has stopped the practice of providing preferred parking for low emissions vehicles at certain Federal facilities. I first noticed it during a visit to the Visitors center at the Gettysburg battlefield. It is a discriminatory policy that should be shut down.

Reply to  RAH
July 1, 2018 1:38 pm

Then again, segregated parking for vehicles that can burst into flame could be a good idea.

Reply to  Slacko
July 2, 2018 10:01 am

In that case, they should be at the back of the parking lot, well away from the building and other cars.

Rich Davis
Reply to  mwhite
July 1, 2018 7:11 am

Electric cars—tech from the 19th century. Why are they not a “ laughable, outdated technology,” that as Schwarzenegger said, “It is foolish to bring back“… “to suit your political agenda“.

What about 14th century windmills?

Coal-fired electricity generation is reliable, efficient, and cheap. It’s only defect is that it offends modern religious sentiment. It generates more CO2 per kW-h than other fuels.

So of course what that actually means is that coal has an additional positive attribute that it is efficient at fertilizing crops to support a growing population. The religious belief that CO2 will cause CAGW is just wrong.

Reply to  Rich Davis
July 1, 2018 7:38 am

ok, to be fair…electric cars are actually a superior technology, the problem is that they are tethered to batteries – that’s what’s killing them. If there were a magical storage capability, it may be that very few gasoline engines would be sold.

Batteries are the real joke here.

Rich Davis
Reply to  MikeEE
July 1, 2018 7:56 am

Yes that’s true. I actually would like to have an ev if I didn’t routinely drive over 200 miles on a trip and live in a cold climate. Regardless of whether the battery technology can be made safer, cheaper, and higher capacity, the electricity has to come from somewhere reliable, preferably inexpensive. So not windmills, not solar. Geothermal might work in some locations.

Natural gas is a great option, currently cheaper than coal, but how much of that is due to intentionally-punishing regulations that could be relaxed or met with cheaper technical solutions? I’m not for allowing actual pollution just to get cheaper electricity though. And then there’s nuclear, the poster child for intentionally-punishing overregulation, which should be cheapest of all.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Rich Davis
July 1, 2018 8:14 am

Coal plants practically eliminated real pollution years ago, hence, the moving goal posts and claiming CO2 is pollution.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Rich Davis
July 1, 2018 8:56 am

And so would everyone else, Rich. But then no one could afford them because lithium and cobalt prices would be so astronomical that the batteries would be orders more expensive.

To put it into perspective, if oil were replaced with EVs right now, the entire known supply of lithium would run out in just 7 years. More lithium will be found, but clearly not enough for us to replace our entire transportation sector with lithium-ion batteries.

Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 9:16 am

“the entire known supply of lithium would run out in just 7 years. ”

Hardly for two reasons.
1) The total lithium content of seawater is very large and is estimated as 230 billion tonnes
2) Lithium mine production has an estimated resource quantity of 53 million tons

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 10:01 am

A 100% EV world would require nearly thirty-fold increase in lithium production…

comment image

Putting this into the context of mineral reserves… 600 million EV’s would consume 907% of the 2015 proved lithium reserves and 615% of the 2015 proved cobalt reserves. That’s a lot. That’s disruptive.

Proved reserves are a fraction of probable reserves and resource potential… So, it’s not impossible… for lithium. Cobalt, on the other hand… Global proved cobalt reserves are around 7 million metric tons. 615% of 7,000,000 metric tons is over 43,000,000 metric tons. This not only exceeds the 2015 proved reserves of cobalt, it exceeds the identified terrestrial resource potential…

Identified world terrestrial cobalt resources are about 25 million tons. The vast majority of these resources are in sediment-hosted stratiform copper deposits in Congo (Kinshasa) and Zambia; nickel-bearing laterite deposits in Australia and nearby island countries and Cuba; and magmatic nickel-copper sulfide deposits hosted in mafic and ultramafic rocks in Australia, Canada, Russia, and the United States. More than 120 million tons of cobalt resources have been identified in manganese nodules and crusts on the floor of the Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans.

Reply to  David Middleton
July 1, 2018 10:18 am

You forget David, that Li-ion batteries can be made with a different material besides cobalt. For example LiFePO4, LiMn2O4, Li2MnO3, and LMO.

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 10:37 am

Cobalt is what delivers range.

If you ask people for their number one concern about making the jump to an electric vehicle, driving range will pretty much always be the answer. No matter how many press releases automakers send out touting incremental improvements, people still worry about being left stranded. The reason is simple: Even with Level 2 equipment, it still takes several hours to charge up an EV, and people know they don’t have that kind of time. Even a DC Fast Charger (if your car supports it) takes most of an hour if you want more than 80% of your range.


According to New Scientist Magazine, German company BASF is also working on improved cobalt-nickel battery technology that will provide the sought-after experience of a charging station that works as quickly as a gas fill-up and which provides roughly 300 miles of range in a standard EV.

In lithium ion batteries, cobalt is a key component of the cathode. The batteries operate by shuttling lithium ions back and forth between the electrodes, which are layered materials that can intercalate the lithium ions. The cathode material therefore needs to have the right crystal structure to accommodate the ions, be stable enough to withstand ions moving in and out without changing, have valence orbitals available to accept electrons to balance the ion charges and the capacity to store as many lithium ions as possible. Transition metal oxides meet all these requirements to some degree, and cobalt gives just about the best performance across the board.

‘There will always be a certain amount of cobalt needed in these cathodes,’ says Ceder. ‘What happens in most metals, when the lithium moves out, is the metals start to move into those empty spaces. What is so spectacular about cobalt is that it is extremely immobile in these structures,’ he explains. The first cathode in the very first lithium ion battery, conceived by John Goodenough, was lithium cobalt oxide. Paired with a graphite anode, it has the highest energy density of commercialised lithium ion batteries, making it the go-to cathode for smartphones and tablets.

Today lithium cobalt oxide cathodes consist of 60% cobalt and offer unbeatable energy density. ‘In portable electronics everything is about energy by volume – not weight or cost – and cobalt is the best option,’ says Ceder. ‘Consumer electronics don’t care about the cost of the lithium ion battery in your phone. It is all about the real estate it takes up.’

Reply to  David Middleton
July 1, 2018 10:50 am

David, battery technology is not static as seems apparent in your worldview.
Try to think outside of the box:

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 11:45 am

The future is always so bright…

Pat Frank
Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 2, 2018 9:33 am

You still need lithium metal, Betty, aside from lithium ion. It’s lithium metal that provides the current that the batteries deliver.

And lithium metal must be made from lithium ion using electricity from elsewhere.

Reply to  David Middleton
July 2, 2018 2:13 am

ah yes! isnt china making a mess on the seafloor dredging some of that up?
havent heard the greenies screaming about that…yet

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 10:15 am

2) That means 10 cubic meters of seawater contains one gram of Lithium.
By the way those 10 cubic meters also contains 0.9 grams of copper, so why are we still mining copper?

Reply to  tty
July 1, 2018 10:39 am

There’s gold in them thar seawater too! LOL!

R. Shearer
Reply to  tty
July 1, 2018 1:44 pm

And a heck of lot of hydrogen, ~100 g/L.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 10:17 am

So if building enough batteries to turn the world’s transportation fleet into EVs would exhaust the continental resource in 7 years, 7.57 million tonnes per year, we’d exhaust the entire ocean’s supply in just another 30 years.

And 230 billion tonnes is not “very large.” The ocean weighs about 1,315,000,000,000,000,000 tonnes and lithium content is 0.000183 g/L. So it would require passing about 5,500,000 L of water through the system to collect 1 tonne of lithium.

Let’s say we can pump 1,000 L/h at 20 kWh. The 5,500,000 L of water requires 110,000 kW just to pump. That’s about $14,000 (US prices) just for electricity to get a tonne of lithium, and at 100 kg/20kW battery, that’s 10 batteries. This is all very (very very) conservative because the head would be more than what I used to calculate the power required, the actual power requirements for the entire operation would be much higher.

The current price of lithium is about $13,000/tonne, which includes mining, processing, shipping, and the meager margins of the mining industry. What would the price need to be to make skimming 183 micrograms per liter of ocean water cost effective? Who’s going to be paying for EVs with that price?

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 10:30 am

Oh whoops! That’s 5,500,000 liters per kg, so just a paltry 5.5 billion liters of sea water needed per tonne. That throws those costs into cosmonaut range. Elon Musk MIGHT be able to afford an EV under this scenario.

Steve Richards
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 11:39 am

Funny how a few calculations can ruin a greenies suggestion that its EVs all the way…..

Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 3:16 pm

At some point, the largest reserves of Lithium (and cobalt) would be used Lithium batteries.

I mean, Lithium is not burned out, It is still in the battery. It shouldn´t be that expensive to recycle it.

Reply to  Urederra
July 1, 2018 7:27 pm

But it is. It’s currently cheaper to purchase new Lithium than to recycle it, and there is no sign of this changing soon.

Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 2, 2018 2:16 am

betcha theres some rare fish that needs the lithium in seawater to exist and hence it will be banned from use;-) roflmao

Reply to  ozspeaksup
July 2, 2018 9:44 am

Save the Red Fin Lithium tuna NOW!

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 2:38 pm

The ocean also contains billions of dollars worth of gold. Just run down to the beach and extract it. Better take a 55 gal drum of sunscreen. You may be there a long, long, long, long, long, long time.

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 1, 2018 6:36 pm

How much energy is required to extract the Li from the seawater?
From whence the energy ?
– not to mention the energy required to produce the required materials, assembly,
fac ilities, transportation…
Like my grandparents used to say – you kids think gasoline grows on trees

Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 2, 2018 2:11 am

toxicity and processing needs to get lithium for seawater extraction?
real pollution from RE minerals isnt a joke.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Betty Pfeiffer
July 2, 2018 9:29 am

That’s lithium ion mines, Betty, and the lithium ion content of sea water.

Lithium ion is Li(1+). It needs an electron to become lithium metal, and thus to be useful in a battery.

Guess where that electron comes from. Right. From a power plant that generates electricity.

Guess how that electricity is made. Right. Burning coal, or oil, or natural gas (or hydro power, or nuclear).

Earth to Betty: no free lunches, over. . . .

Reply to  MikeEE
July 1, 2018 10:31 am

Mike EE
Assuming you are an engineer,
you should know that the whole
system must be examined, starting
with mining coal, producing natural gas
and other sources of energy.

By the time that underground energy
is used to move the car, about 85%
of the initial energy has been wasted.

Having to charge batteries is part
of the problem, but not the whole problem.

I wrote an article about the subject
a few months ago, that may interest you.

If you believe anything in the article is wrong,
please tell me.

Ian Macdonald
Reply to  MikeEE
July 1, 2018 2:52 pm

Basic issue is the same as the difference between a rocket or jet powered cruise missile. The jet version, although more expensive to build, has up to 3x the range because it only carries fuel, not oxidiser as well.

Plus, the reactants in a battery can’t be too energetic or they react of their own accord, causing self-discharge. The piston or jet engine (or fuel cell) can use more energy-dense fuels, degradation not being a problem since the oxidiser is separate.

Reply to  MikeEE
July 2, 2018 2:09 am

well unless they manage some amazing method to allow cars to run like trams do?
the batteries re always going to be the weighty and possibly volatile issue
to run cars like trams would assume rigid defined routes only..why bother.
cant see that being useful to the masses myself;-)

Reply to  MikeEE
July 2, 2018 6:02 am

Pikes Peak Hillclimb Results 2018:
7:57:148—Volkswagen makes racing history with record-breaking electric race car
Electric power beats the internal combustion engine fair and square in major motorsport. Part of the $2B investment in US electric development after diesel scandal?

Yes, very different from day-to-day driving and the load of massive numbers of cars on the grid. But in this narrow segment, electric rules – and has been fastest in the past – and is predicted to be THE technology to beat in this particular race.

Reply to  fxk
July 2, 2018 8:54 am

IMO automobile racing will be the absolute last area to be penetrated by EVs… I just cannot see any dedicated or even casual race fan bothering to watch a bunch of cars roll near-silently around (or along) a track. EVs will have some uses in some places for sure, by some people, but not on a race track where fans expect to hear the roar and whine of high powered engines, be able to smell the gasoline/racing fuel and other smells associated with ICE engines, and watch spectacular crashes. There would be no traditional smells or sounds with EVs, and honestly, a crash would be quite dangerous and probably require the evacuation of everyone in the stands.
Not to mention other ICE engine vehicle events that are popular in many places, like monster truck shows and demolition derbys. An all EV future would certainly kill most of what is known as “car culture”, especially here in the US. And not to mention how lame car chases in movies would become – losing the roar of engines would be like not having the “pew-pew” sounds when laser weapons fire in Starwars movies…

Reply to  fxk
July 2, 2018 10:04 am

Great for drag racing. Not so good for anything longer than a few miles.

Reply to  MarkW
July 8, 2018 10:51 am

“Great for drag racing. Not so good for anything longer than a few miles”

That is changing. The NIO EP9 is a pure BEV and managed 6m 46s around the Nurburgring in May 2017, a very strenuous 13 mile run.

That puts at least one pure EV in such company as McLaren P1, Porsche 918 Spyder, Dodge Viper ACR, Lamborghini Huracan Performante, etc.
And some of those top 100s are hybrids.
ICE / hybrids will continue to dominate very long races for some time.

“where fans expect to hear the roar and whine of high powered engines”
I find tire noise to be the primary sound and high perf electric motors do make noise. Or you can fake it.

Reply to  MikeEE
July 2, 2018 9:08 pm

“[Electric Car} Batteries are the real joke here.”

Surprised the government hasn’t tried really long extension cords.

That would work about as well as all their other “green energy” solutions.

Reply to  Rich Davis
July 2, 2018 2:06 am

hey..14th century windmills could provide milling force 24/7 as long as they had water, which they could also pump or be used to drain off.
they could also have been used to mill lumber i dont know if they did ?but it wouldnt have been beyond their tech.
todays mega costly birdshredders might provide somepower to do any of that…briefly -some days- from what i’ve seen.

Reply to  mwhite
July 2, 2018 6:47 am

Speaking of misled, what happens when two older Priuses collide slow speed in a parking lot? The real answer is they are both totaled from an insurance standpoint because of the extra thin metal skin used on them and the inability to replace it. I think certain low income, bad driver Prius owners already know this one. That’s not even getting to the safety aspect of ‘extra thin’ cladding.

July 1, 2018 3:54 am

Gordon Bennett, he is an actor, paid millions to repeat lines, end of chat.

Reply to  Julian
July 1, 2018 4:16 am

Oh please. He was Governor on the back of being a “celebrity”. It didn’t hurt having access to the Kennedy shctick. 😉

Reply to  lee
July 1, 2018 2:42 pm

Ahnie is a Cryptocrat.

F. Ross
Reply to  lee
July 1, 2018 9:31 pm

And a RINO governor at that.

Reply to  Julian
July 1, 2018 5:21 am

Gordon Bennett was an extravagant American billionaire with a penchant for yachts and fast cars. Hence the exclamation of surprise ‘gordon bennett’….


Reply to  Julian
July 1, 2018 12:00 pm

Mr. Schwarzenegger is a UN facilitator. This can be tracked back to his association and activities with the UNDP while he was governor of California.

His family association with the Kennedy family and cousin Joe Kennedy on the Board of the Chicago Climate Exchange along with fellow Board Member Maurice Strong.

July 1, 2018 4:01 am

It would be nice to leave out the name calling and just present views based upon science. That is what this site , as I understand it, is supposed to be about. Science and fact. No need to slide to a lower level.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Greg
July 1, 2018 7:37 am

Concern troll much?

Reply to  Greg
July 1, 2018 10:35 am

The other side of the climate change debate,
who I call the global warmunists,
debate almost entirely with name calling,
not real science.

If we skeptics do name calling,
it is only to improve communication,
by using the only language
the global warmunists understand.

Reply to  Richard Greene
July 2, 2018 2:49 am

If a warmist would be saying that you would be rightly pointing out the hypocrisy. Injustice is fixed by justice, not by another injustice. Reasonable people won’t and shouldn’t find name calling very convincing, and if you use name calling just because your opponent uses it, then you are no better than them. Ad hominem is ad hominem. Doesn’t matter which side uses it. Besides it’s silly to think that name calling will somehow “improve communication” and convince anyone.

This is yet another evidence how broken this whole mess is.

Reply to  Richard Greene
July 2, 2018 3:29 am

First off, so my position in known, I don’t believe in turning the other cheek just “slapping” back again and again with facts. When, I ask, has a point ever been proven —or an understanding reached-with insulting name calling to start a conversation?

Reply to  Greg
July 2, 2018 2:20 am

well arrnies not using science and his past contacts and influencers ARE of concern as they DO have a bearing on his outlook and stance.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  Greg
July 2, 2018 2:53 am

Schwarzenegger’s a RINO! a RINO, a RINO…

Sorry to upset you, concern troll.

Peta of Newark
July 1, 2018 4:20 am

Oooooh Donald, “3 months reserve” – u iz on da thin ice there.

Reason being that there is only 74 days worth of Global Nutrient Free & Tasteless Mush Reserve.
(Nearly used the word ‘food’ there but thought I’d better get it right in case any pandents are around)

So, who will be using all the energy reserve on Day 75+

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 1, 2018 8:07 am

Still can’t post anything on-topic.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
July 1, 2018 10:37 am

On topic? I’d settle for coherent.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 1, 2018 9:32 am

If our electricity goes off the ice cream in the freezer needs to be eaten or thrown out in about 24 hours. Others foods might last 3 days, only because we have about ½ pound of ice for each pound of solid food, for example chicken or ground beef.

Peta’s comment seems to imply that the total reserve food supply of Earth is somehow relevant to a loss of local or regional electric power that might last a few days or weeks. Even in the case of Puerto Rico, where poor government, bad choices, and a storm, crippled the power generation, the “Global Nutrient Free & Tasteless Mush Reserve” has not been stressed. In fact, it didn’t notice.

As Jeff Alberts suggests @8:07, Peta of Newark needs to up-her-game and try again.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 2, 2018 2:24 am

i gather theres a LOT of cheese in reserve though;-)
see zerohedge yesterday ..assuming it isnt the processed goop anyway

Steve Jones
Reply to  Peta of Newark
July 2, 2018 8:50 am

Peta, we agree on one thing; pandents are soooooo tedious.

July 1, 2018 4:23 am

I doubt that anyone with a couple of functioning brain cells pays much attention to what the Hollywood cretins are saying these days. Their constant protests and obvious hateful nastiness starting the day after the election in 2016 and continuing from the likes of De Niro at every opportunity reached the total saturation point long ago. But I want them to keep it up. They, like much of the press and the rest of the “resistance” are too stupid, too self absorbed, to understand that such antics only help the politicians they hate so much.

Reply to  RAH
July 1, 2018 4:47 am

RAH, you know things are going on the right direction when Hollywood is angry. I saw the other day the Denero wants to punch Trump….raging 🙂

Alan Robertson
Reply to  RAH
July 1, 2018 5:23 am


Reply to  RAH
July 1, 2018 10:40 am

Actually, when I want to know about
the coming Climate disaster.
the first three “experts” I listen to are
Al Bore, Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Pope.
They are a scientific ‘”Dream Team”.
Al Bore is rich and famous.
Arnold is rich and famous.
The Pope is surrounded by riches, and famous.
What other qualifications are needed,
to become a climate science expert?

Greg Cavanagh
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 2, 2018 10:38 pm

I don’t know what wage the Pope pulls, but he lives in opulence, surrounded by marble and gold and the best paintings that money can buy. He must be a better climate scientist than those other two slackers.

Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 4:36 am

Arnie with his very high public profile is doing a great job in terminating climate change. He is more popular than Trump ever will be and the Donald is jealous. Keep up the good work Arnie!

Tom in Florida
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 5:36 am

You forgot the /sarc. But perhaps……no you couldn’t be that ignorant now could you?

Reply to  Tom in Florida
July 1, 2018 10:04 am

That ignorant and more so.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 6:01 am

Schwarzenegger mocks Trump about coal use but he doesn’t see the massive quantity of goods from coal-powered factories in China etc. flooding the US through California ports. We do a great job of hiding our dependence on coal out of sight while virtue- signaling with our Tesla’s etc.

Greg Woods
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 6:10 am

Question for young Ivanhoe: How does one go about terminating climate change? Really…

Reply to  Greg Woods
July 1, 2018 10:45 am

Greg Woods
“Terminating” the coming climate change disaster is easy.
The leftists merely declare the climate crisis has been solved,
thanks to them ( a “crisis” that never existed in the first place,
can be “stopped” at any time! ).

Of course the climate will continue to change,
but that will be harmless changes, just like the past
few thousand years.

R. Shearer
Reply to  Greg Woods
July 1, 2018 1:45 pm

I give up. Impregnate your housekeeper?

R. Shearer
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 6:42 am

I think it it Arnold who is jealous. His ratings are lower and he wants to be President but knows he can never be.

Farmer Ch E retired
Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 7:34 am

Ivankinsman – be careful using popularity as a measure of correctness. In 1938 the Austrian public voted in a referendum 99.75% in favor to merge with Germany. Arnie seems harmless but the movement may not be so harmless.
Arnie has the looks, the accent, the popularity, and the megaphone. All I have is an MS having passed college courses such as Momentum, Mass, and Heat Transfer, Organic Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, Thermodynamics, Mathematical Physics, etc. . . . But I lack the popularity and have no megaphone.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Farmer Ch E retired
July 1, 2018 9:01 am

The idea that climate activism is the majority opinion is as delusional as the idea that our CO2 emissions will lead to runaway warming. The danger is in politicians lying to become elected, such as Obama, and then enacting radicalized policy after they’re in office.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 10:04 am

So Arnie has guaranteed that there will never be another ice age. The terminator is more effective than even he imagined.
As to CO2, the guy who drives the biggest Humvee on the planet is your idea of a climate warrior? Sheesh, just how clueless are you?

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 1, 2018 10:18 am

That may be, but Arnie lives in a fantasy world (even his political stint was a fanciful meme and easily forgotten) while The Donald is handling the reins of President rather well, thank you.

I seriously doubt The Donald is jealous of anyone or anything at this point. The Don’s next project? Keep America Great. That’s another 4-year term, by the way.

Reply to  Ivan Kinsman
July 2, 2018 8:32 am

Nice to see you back today, your humorous opinions enlivens the day for some of us.


July 1, 2018 5:10 am

They also misled customers in their adverts, by saying that the Leaf had no emissions.

I took Nissan to the advertising standards agency, pointing to the large gas and coal fired power stations in the UK. And Nissan were forced to change their adverts.

So what did the new advert say?? “Nissan Leaf – the car without an exhaust pipe….”


Reply to  ralfellis
July 1, 2018 7:03 am

No matter if they are electric, hybrid or diesel/gas, all of them emit PM10s

So the “no emissions” is only true if you choose what counts as emissions and what does not count. Just like everything else the green mafia labels as sustainable.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Urederra
July 1, 2018 9:49 am

The chart linked to by Urederra has zero brake wear and larger tire wear for EVs. EVs can be expected to have 20-30% of the brake wear of a similar sized ICE vehicle – so I’ve read.
That chart requires some explaining, dates, and assumptions, without which it is of no great interest.

Reply to  John F. Hultquist
July 1, 2018 3:10 pm

Sorry, I just wanted to point out that EV cars emit PM10s (and PM2.5s). I posted the first chart I found over the internet as a proof. You might be right about the brake wear. And I don’t doubt you can find more accurate charts. but the point about EV cars emitting particulate matter still holds. I hope we can agree on that.

July 1, 2018 5:26 am

In a way people like the Stupidnator make me feel good, alittle. No genius at all, but apparently I’m way smarter than almost everyone in entertainment, the media, academia, politics, alot of businesses, and just about anywhere else. Not including this site & a few others, of course.

Tom in Florida
July 1, 2018 5:38 am

This is what washed up actors do. They just need a little attention once in a while to believe they are still relevant.

Reply to  Tom in Florida
July 1, 2018 10:50 am

Tom in Florider:
Arnold could do something
much more exciting to get attention,
like getting his maid pregnant,
and divorcing his wife.

July 1, 2018 5:39 am

Any discussion of electric power needs to start with the primary objectives, as for example mine:
1. Reliable power
2. Cheap power
3. Minimize fossil fuel consumption where possible

vs the South Australian model:
1. Dangerously high level of renewables
2. Expensive power to discourage grannies from heating their homes
3. Not available very often to discourage industry from existing.

July 1, 2018 5:51 am

Grow up Arnold.

M Courtney
July 1, 2018 6:07 am

If he thinks going back to coal is too far then he’ll be amazed that some people are looking even further back to wind.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  M Courtney
July 1, 2018 9:51 am

That’s funny!

July 1, 2018 6:20 am

Climate Clown?

So adult.

Reply to  Alley
July 2, 2018 11:03 am

Have you a better descriptor?

Tom Halla
July 1, 2018 6:21 am

Arnold was so disappointing as Governor. Gray Davis was recalled partly because of the blackouts, and I thought the green madness would be discredited for a long time. Schwartzenegger apparently forgot how he won in the first place.

Hans Erren
July 1, 2018 6:26 am

Why do I get a vision of Doofenshmirtz?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Hans Erren
July 1, 2018 9:56 am

Perhaps you are of a youngish age and have children. I had to look that up.
Others of us might think of Master Sergeant Schultz.

Shawn Marshall
July 1, 2018 7:08 am

Proud to say I have never seen a Schwartz-nagger movie. There is enough chaos and inanity in life without celebrating a dimwitted nonentity.

July 1, 2018 7:09 am

Don’t use coal because it is causing something that is not happening. At least Arnold is talking in terms he understands, show business.

Tom Gelsthorpe
July 1, 2018 7:14 am

The Blockheadocracy, including the Terminator and billionaire blowhard Tom Steyer, daily bite the hands that feed, light, warm & cool them, and trumpet that ingratitude as a moral imperative. To add injury to insult, they wish misery-inflicting, retrograde policies on the poor, both foreign and domestic.

“The peasants have no modern lights & stoves? Let them burn cow flop.”

Dr. Strangelove
July 1, 2018 7:26 am

Long live coal!

comment image

Roger Knights
Reply to  Dr. Strangelove
July 1, 2018 6:00 pm

I once was a passenger on a steam-powered train, in the early 1950s. Soot would get in the windows if they were opened.

Reply to  Dr. Strangelove
July 2, 2018 2:31 am

when the electric trains were all stranded in the UK a couple of winters was Coal Trains that got them moved and saved people n goods.

July 1, 2018 7:27 am

Here is what was said in the Bloomberg article: “The Energy Department would exercise emergency authority under a pair of federal laws to direct the operators to purchase electricity or electric generation capacity from at-risk facilities, according to a memo obtained by Bloomberg News.”

Here is what Eric quoted. “According to an internal White House memo obtained by Bloomberg a few weeks ago, President Trump explored providing support for energy suppliers who kept three months reserve fuel supply onsite, to protect grid resilience.”

It’s interesting how you spin grid resilience out of the fact that coal fired plants cannot compete with gas fired. And that you didn’t mention at-risk facilities, meaning those that cannot compete. Coal losing out to gas has nothing to do with grid resilience, if anything gas is a lot more responsive to demand surges than coal is.

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Chris
July 1, 2018 7:51 am

Are you really that stupid or just ignorant? Coal most certainly can compete with gas given a level playng field, whch, thanks to Zero, coal no longer has. All Trump is trying to do is Make the Playing Field Level Again.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
July 1, 2018 8:55 am

Another post from “no facts, just empty bluster” Bruce Cobb. Coal levelized costs are not remotely close to those for combined cycle natural gas.

Reply to  Chris
July 1, 2018 3:36 pm

It really is fascinating how you will believe any piece of propaganda, so long as it’s agrees with what you already believe.

Reply to  MarkW
July 1, 2018 10:39 pm

MarkW – go ahead and post something to support your position. Otherwise, it’s just more of your usual empty words.

Reply to  Chris
July 2, 2018 10:08 am

Given your posts are self-refuting, why should I post something that’s redundant?

Reply to  MarkW
July 2, 2018 7:12 pm

It’s not self refuting. It shows the levelized cost of new coal-fired power generation, even without CCS, is still higher than combined cycle gas. You’re lazy – we all get that. 50-100 posts per day and no links – it takes a special kinda lazy to accomplish that.

Roger Knights
Reply to  Chris
July 1, 2018 7:58 am

“Coal losing out to gas has nothing to do with grid resilience, if anything gas is a lot more responsive to demand surges than coal is.”

But gas cannot be stored on-site like coal, and so its users are more susceptible to shut-downs from interruptions in supply (from many causes) and from peak-demand spikes by other users.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Chris
July 1, 2018 8:49 am

I always find it entertaining seeing people, that have no clue how our energy sector operates, give their two cents. It’s great just seeing the arm waving and laughable statements such as “if anything gas is a lot more responsive to demand surges than coal is.”

You don’t have this problem with coal:

And were just one real cold January away from the price of heating being the least of people’s concerns.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 10:07 am

I always find it entertaining . . .
Likewise. Thanks for the comment.

Reply to  Chris
July 1, 2018 10:07 am

Apples and oranges. But then you already know that.

Since you’re such a genius, you shouldn’t have any trouble telling us how long a gas fired power plant will operate if supplies are disrupted?

Snarling Dolphin
July 1, 2018 7:30 am

It is indeed foolish, the very height of foolishness in fact, to bring back laughable, outdated technology to suit a misguided and profoundly ignorant political agenda. Wind and solar power are prime examples.

Roger Knights
July 1, 2018 7:48 am

RINO (Arnold) vs. RHINO (Trump): the GOP’s dilemma.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Roger Knights
July 1, 2018 8:28 am

No one with a functioning neuron in their head believes this guy is actually a Republican. The media-invented “dilemma” seems to be working out pretty well for the GOP and not so well for the Dems.

Mike M
July 1, 2018 7:50 am

It’s worse than I thought – he’s so proud of causing bio-fuel habitat destruction that he announces it with a bumper sticker!

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Mike M
July 1, 2018 8:32 am

To be fair, biodiesel is recycled cooking oils. Sure, manufacturing it in large quantities is actually quite risky
but it’s not nearly as harebrained as ethanol.

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 10:22 am

We will see a lot more on this topic over the next 10 years: “waste generation, waste stream composition, and incineration in the context of waste management.”

Recycling of most things is not helpful and landfills always seem problematic. When I was young, we had “dumps” that had rats and black bears scavenging, for food. Now we “dump” at a “transfer station” where I see much wood, paper, and other materials that can be burned for energy.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  John F. Hultquist
July 1, 2018 10:41 am

I think the dozens of examples of biodiesel fuel plants explosions shows just how much more effective and safe simply burning the waste oils would be rather than recycling.

R. Shearer
Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 1:49 pm

Huge tracts of rain forests are being cleared to grow palm for oil to be converted into biodiesel. And in the U.S. and Canada, a lot of canola and soy oil are used for the same.

July 1, 2018 7:51 am

I guess steroids really do rot your brain!

Reply to  MattS
July 2, 2018 2:33 am

you have to have one to start with

Paul Johnson
July 1, 2018 8:03 am

“It is foolish to bring back laughable, outdated technology to suit your political agenda,” Schwarzenegger says. “I mean, what are you going to bring back next?” How about railroad trains, the premier ground transportation of the 19th century?

Mike M
Reply to  Paul Johnson
July 2, 2018 4:07 am

I think “the wheel” qualifies under that description.

Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 8:11 am

Let’s see, the coal industry being hindered by government intervention despite adapting and innovating greatly over 50 years, is not the same as Blockbuster [practically] going out of business because they took advantage of their monopoly for years and failed to adapt. Communists have trouble understanding how Capitalism works.

DJ Meredith
July 1, 2018 8:23 am

Class A hypocrite this Schwarzenegger person. Does he plan on replacing the engine in his surplus army tank with an electric motor and D-cell batteries? Will he retrofit his Gulfstream III with rubber bands?

Reply to  DJ Meredith
July 1, 2018 11:45 am

And as governor of CA, he often flew via private jet from CA to and from Sacramento vs living up their full time or flying via an airline:

Loved his drive and accomplishments during his younger days. Don’t know why he switched to this green religion (environmentalism) loved by socialists.

Reply to  kramer
July 2, 2018 2:54 am

Yeah, I love him as an actor. He’s so iconic. I just wish he and other actors would focus on what they are good at: acting.

July 1, 2018 8:25 am

Redbox is still around.

It was a hard thing to do and to time, but retrenchment was in order. It is obvious in hindsight.

I do not know that I could have sold that much property and fired that many employees.

Blockbuster could have survived in altered form.

Swartzenegger’s negatives are very high . It gets easier every day to skip watching his movies except for Terminator & Conan.

He keeps it up and those will be thrown in the dustbin, too.

Robert W. Turner
Reply to  Charles
July 1, 2018 10:45 am

Blockbuster still survives in places without good internet, like Fairbanks, Alaska. The failure of the company should be used as the poster child in business classes today for leadership failing to plan and adapt. From $6 billion in revenue to gone, all because they couldn’t foresee events unfolding right in front of them.

Reply to  Robert W. Turner
July 1, 2018 4:31 pm

Sounds a lot like the story of Kodak.

July 1, 2018 8:34 am

Latest from the BBC
The UK’s catastrophic shortage of CO2 continues, supermarkets ration sale of fizzy drinks, … pigs stunned!

Reply to  vukcevic
July 1, 2018 10:35 am

meanwhile a bit further down the road Elon Musk and greens are set for a bit of an internecine fight.
Looking forward to it.

John K. Sutherland
July 1, 2018 8:39 am

‘Schwartzy’ is a twerp, but I still like the clown.

Andy Pattullo
July 1, 2018 8:56 am

I have science based degrees, does that make me qualified to act in crappy Hollywood blockbusters?

John F. Hultquist
Reply to  Andy Pattullo
July 1, 2018 10:32 am

Yes. You might be the first smart male in movies.
See Mayim Bialik, Lisa Kudrow, Geena Davis, and Hedy Lamarr.

Reply to  John F. Hultquist
July 1, 2018 11:08 am

John Hultquist:
Hedy Lamarr’s engineering “hobby” was amazing.

Another actor who actually got an engineering degree,
but never used it, was Dolph Lundgren

He’s got a master’s degree in chemical engineering,
and left behind a Fulbright Scholarship at MIT,
to become an actor.

He speaks five languages,
and was the European karate champion
in the early 80′s.

A bizarre biography.

Gary Pearse
July 1, 2018 9:03 am

This precisely the reason his scripts were three word sentences as few as possible.

Edith Wenzel
July 1, 2018 9:11 am

Time to retire Arnold. Your politics is worse than your acting.

John F. Hultquist
July 1, 2018 9:12 am

What we see here is an attempt by Arnold Schwarzenegger to bring back Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has become irrelevant.
This is sort of like trying to find a use for an empty beer bottle.
“I really don’t care. Do U?”

July 1, 2018 10:03 am

In other words, if you are a notable actor, you can say, “I’m rich, I’m famous, I’m successful, I’m comfortable times ten compared to most people, and it’s all because of fossil fuel, BUT if you are not already all of these things, then you cannot do this the way I have done and AM still doing it — you have to actualize my fantasy of neoEden — I did all this acting for YOU to nurture YOUR fantasies, now it’s YOUR turn to nurture MY fantasies.

July 1, 2018 10:08 am

Coal has already been “rescued”, Mr. Schwartzy… Too bad you haven’t taken the time to figure that out, sir.

July 1, 2018 10:18 am

Do steroids cause brain damage?

Bruce Cobb
Reply to  Richard Greene
July 1, 2018 10:25 am

Arnie says no, they don’t cause dain bramage.

July 1, 2018 10:26 am

Steroid poisoning.

July 1, 2018 10:27 am

Bought and paid for by the globalists. Enemy of humanity.

Then he can tell China to stop building plants every day.

Bob Denby
July 1, 2018 10:41 am

Even more frightening than, “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” — (bureaucrat of choice), is “..I’ll be back!…”

Bruce Cobb
July 1, 2018 11:54 am

Arnie should go back in time. And stay there.

July 1, 2018 1:35 pm

Floppy disks? I thought the brainless Strawman belonged to an entirely different movie.

Slacko from Oz

Gordon Dressler
July 1, 2018 1:40 pm

Schwarzenegger obviously didn’t make reference to going back in time to rescue his marriage to Maria Shriver . . . that would have required him to, ahem, terminate himself.

July 1, 2018 2:20 pm

Well thst does it!
We had better get rid of the oldest fsiled energy source, wind.
Thanks, Governor!
The future will thank you.

Ian Macdonald
July 1, 2018 2:32 pm

Pity can’t just reflash his chip like they did in the movie.

Gunga Din
July 1, 2018 3:35 pm

“So President Trump, I know you really want to be an action hero, right?”

Arnold, Arnold, Guess what? You’re not an “Action Hero” either.
You just played one in the movies. (Many of them I liked. One of my favs was “The Last Action Hero”. When my kids were young, I had them watch it. Good job (unintentionally) showing the difference between Hollywood and Real Life.)
Trump is actually producing “action” despite resistance from all sides to regain and/or preserve what this nation was founded on, The Constitution and The Bill of Rights.
He may not be perfect but he certainly comes closer to a real life “Action Hero” than you have…in real life.

Reply to  Gunga Din
July 1, 2018 3:36 pm

Gunga Din
Reply to  David Middleton
July 1, 2018 3:50 pm

(Anybody know how to add a “multiplier” to the +/- thing?8- )

D. Anderson
July 1, 2018 3:39 pm

Ahnold reading Trump’s mind.

““So President Trump, I know you really want to be an action hero, right?”

So Ahnold, I know you really didn’t want to be such a failure as Governor.

Reply to  D. Anderson
July 1, 2018 5:15 pm

If President Trump started (S)hitting bars of Pure Gold, the left wing nuts would complain that he was stealing the wealth of the unknown universe !!

Michael Jankowski
July 1, 2018 4:24 pm

“It is foolish to bring back laughable, outdated technology to suit your political agenda,” Schwarzenegger says. “I mean, what are you going to bring back next? Floppy disks? Fax machines? Beanie Babies? Beepers? Or Blockbuster? Think about it. What if you tried to save Blockbuster?”

There are 3rd graders that can frame this better.

FWIW, the Terminator franchise is set to release a 6th movie in 2019. Arnie’s likeness was CGI’d in the last one or two versions, but he’s back in full for this one. First one was good as was the 2nd…although the CGI hasn’t stood the test of time. But a 6th? Come on. At least it’s not for a political agenda…is just for $$$$$$$$$.

Reply to  Michael Jankowski
July 1, 2018 5:23 pm

I be baaack….someday !!

Edith wenzel
July 1, 2018 7:21 pm

Take away fossil fuel Arnold and we will be going back to “ Floppy disks Fax machines Beanie Babies Beepers Or Blockbuster Think about it bobble head, everything after these that you enjoy now (i.e. cellphone, cds/dvds etc.) are made with Petroleum. Dummy! Must have taken too many hits to the head. I suggest you stick to making muscle movies.

Tom Abbott
July 1, 2018 7:53 pm

Next thing you know, ole Arnold will be making fun of the Chinese for using coal.

Neither Trump nor the Chinese will pay any attention to Arnold.

July 1, 2018 9:25 pm

Arnie was most effective in movies when he said almost nothing .
He should stick to movies and tend that picket fence .

July 2, 2018 2:02 am

arnie married well or he’d have been in the gym and maybe a bit part or two..
his opinion on anything outside a gym back then and now as well?
air n gas.

July 2, 2018 2:05 am

I wonder what Lassie, Rin-Tin-Tin & Beethoven have to say re AGW? After all … they are also in the entertainment industry.

Reply to  KAT
July 2, 2018 2:42 am

well Lassie n Rin tin tins opinions might be if you cant eat it or scr*w it
then pee on it;-)

Reply to  ozspeaksup
July 2, 2018 11:14 am

same as arnolds’ opinions about everyone else

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
July 2, 2018 2:45 am

His movies were good. But that is about it.

July 2, 2018 5:52 am

Schwarzenegger may very well be a climate clown but using terms like that in a headline degrade our position as presenting “real news”. Cheap shots like this and “Gorable Warming” might well be red meat for the faithful, but turn away any people who may be on the fence. We look petty and idiotic when we resort to calling names. Do we really want to be a race to the bottom?

July 2, 2018 6:41 am

He’s still trying to climb out of rehab. Global warming cries must be the most handy distracting message in cases of sexual misconduct as seen by Arnold and the Vatican.

July 2, 2018 10:26 am

All very interesting comments but you all missed the obvious retort to the governator which is that in v1.0 he himself went back in time to destroy the future of humanity, so we just have to wait and LOOK FORWARD TO Trump’s 2nd term!

July 2, 2018 1:05 pm

roidman arnold used to make fun of a deaf guy because he couldnt hear the stupidity coming from roidman arnold’s ignorant pie hole. perhaps roidman should stick to do what he does best, having extra-marital affairs with the maids.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights