Total's profits and investments in renewable energy

[nonoLeRobot]

http://www.chercarburant.org/ ou l'on voit qu'il devient urgent de surtaxer les carburants pour que Total et les autres s'en foutent un peu plus dans les fouilles

Uh, I haven't read the article, but I haven't understood everything. The more the surcharge, the less Total puts it in the pockets, but it is the State and so much the better (a little provoking I admit ;-)) because the State is us! Finally you because I am in England

[Christophe]

Uh, I did not read the article, but I did not understand everything.

That's the sentence! Hop in the 2 under !!

[Woodcutter]

[...] Ecolo = the less expensive it is. (the green ecologist what ...) [...]

Uh ... that's your two examples, it's a little pushed to the extreme, right?
It's a bit like the people who treat me of bobo because I eat organic and I go to work by bike (thank you Mr. Renaud Séchan! ... )

Anyway, in these two examples, I see only the stinginess actually (or a complete misunderstanding of the subject) ...

[Christophe]

Ben my 2 examples are unfortunately more common than we think I am the 1er to deplore it!

Example 3: the ecologist who burns (chimney) an old treated floor (which in mass must contain as much chemicals as cellulose) ... I'm not telling you the black smoke ... Style burning of tire ...

If it tells you we can do a topic dedicated to this ...

[bham]

If if it is where you confuse ecologist and econologist ... I caricature:
Ecolo = the less expensive it is. (the stingy ecologist what ...) ...

It is indeed a big caricature, as the woodcutter says, even if opportunists become green by financial calculation, giving themselves good conscience by the same.

So um hum it's more like me who should do it ...
And it's because of such behavior that no one wants to be ECOLO !! ...

You simplify a little bit there no.

For info, here, on the opposite, my definition of an econologue = respect for the planet and resources with but especially BEFORE the search for a financial economy ....

Strictly speaking, I am not looking for financial savings, I am wary of ready-made solutions such as fuel at 3 € / l to change behavior. The most gas-guzzling citizens are certainly those who will give a damn about a surcharge, I know young people who drive in turbo R5s or 4x4s, older people in large gasoline sedans and who "blow" the accelerator. Yes for those there, fuel is not expensive enough, but it will never be expensive enough, these are people who take advantage of what society offers them, period. So when the fuels are more expensive, they will adapt and rather than drive less or drive more economically, they will look for how to make a little more money to pay for the fuel. That's all.
And then it will be necessary to prove to me that the products of the surcharge serve well the ecology, the good management of the energy, the protection of the environment without that it goes into some pockets of multinationals taking the management of the water, waste and Co., as usual.

[Targol]

bham: + general 1 on your previous message !!!

[bham]

Ben my 2 examples are unfortunately more common than we think I am the 1er to deplore it!

Example 3: the ecologist who burns (chimney) an old treated floor (which in mass must contain as much chemicals as cellulose) ... I'm not telling you the black smoke ... Style burning of tire ... ...

Yeah Sir, it's an ecologist because it reduces the volume of waste to treat

No more seriously, I think it's you who confuse ecolos and dubious behavior. It's not good to have a priori negative on the ecologists, not good at all.
Me too, I have long stories like the arm of people who warm themselves to SNCF sleepers, pvc bottles, (if so), who burn their little wood (what's left when we cut a tree) in the forest. burning a tire and I assure you that it's not ecologists, it's just people who do not ask questions, limited the jar perhaps, but especially people who do not see the consequence of their acts.

[bham]

bham: + general 1 on your previous message !!!

Ah, I breathe, thank you for supporting me, Celtic brother!

[Christophe]

No more seriously, I think it's you who confuse ecolos and dubious behavior. It's not good to have a priori negative on the ecologists, not good at all.

I do not think no ... it was EUX who self-defined as ECOLOS ... not me who put the label ... Tiens karthoum here was windy to roll the oil drain and burn his plastic bottle of oil in his stove !!

Ben he is back after my jealous and GOOD riddance ... And yet he defined himself as an ecologist!

Me too, I have long stories like the arm of people who warm themselves to SNCF sleepers, pvc bottles, (if so), who burn their little wood (what's left when we cut a tree) in the forest. burning a tire and I assure you that it's not ecologists, it's just people who do not ask questions, limited the jar perhaps, but especially people who do not see the consequence of their acts.

Listen, you think what you want ... but these people self defined well as ecolo ... That's why I met them (except 1 example) in the work on the pantone ...

[Christophe]

And then it will be necessary to prove to me that the products of the surcharge serve well the ecology, the good management of the energy, the protection of the environment without that it goes into some pockets of multinationals taking the management of the water, waste and Co., as usual.

+ 1 (of course) but Off Subject compared to what they say!

ps: https://www.econologie.com/forums/gasoil-inc ... 4-100.html

If that does not convince you ....