Matt Wuerker by Matt Wuerker

Matt Wuerker

Comments (27) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Enoki

    Enoki said, about 2 years ago

    Question: How much pollution is acceptable?

  2. Stipple

    Stipple said, about 2 years ago

    A good start would be to keep it under levels that have proven in the past to kill up to 96% of all species on Earth.

    Can we keep the toll under 80%, should we shoot for maintaining 50% of remaining species or is that to much to even hope for?

  3. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, about 2 years ago

    Lazy slobs.

  4. Jase99

    Jase99 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    “Fact, we are the cleanest Nation on earth! fact our coal produces only 3% of the demon CO2 right now!”

    I have a feeling the real fact is you have no evidence to back those two “facts” up. The rest of your post smells like a heavily used pasture as well… like a lot of bull sh**.

  5. kitepilot

    kitepilot said, about 2 years ago

    Do you know we tried to do this back in the 1970’s and all the power co. came back with it’s too expensive or the equipment is not there yet. but spent millions lobbing congress to stop this type of rules. If they had spent the money on the problem back then they would not be crying now.

  6. retpost

    retpost said, about 2 years ago

    When we git rid of coal burning , we will have to raise the minimum wage so that joe citizen can afford the power bill.

  7. Quipss

    Quipss said, about 2 years ago

    So, I understand that you believe the USA has something along the lines of 110% of the global population. However it accounts for roughly 5% of the global population. That coal alone accounts for 3% does not give much for a balanced share.

    I believe it is pronounced Be-li-ons. An economy of 17 trillion (That is seventeen thousand billion) can take an impact of billions in rounding errors.

    China now is the largest investor in green energy in the world. While it is true they also invest in coal they have a population about four times greater than the USA. A fair share of responsibility should at least belong to relative size of country.

  8. Radish

    Radish GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Its costs $200 to remove a ton of soot from a smoke stack.

  9. apfelzra

    apfelzra GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    You don’t have facts, you have undocumented numbers. When disruptive technologies are introduced (and in the case of climate change, out of necessity, whether we like it or not), problems will arise and other problems will be solved. Nobody today bemoans the collapse of New England’s whaling industry in the late 19th century because the country began switching to petroleum. Yes, China is now the world’s largest polluter (of CO2 and practically everything else), but America must lead by example. Denying science doesn’t change the facts, Harleyquinn. Doing nothing just means that our children and grandchildren will have to pay all the more for the stupidity and stubbornness of people like you.

  10. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, about 2 years ago

    Because another country is doing something stupid, we’re required to do it too?
    Okay, I’ll tell you what. Remember how polluted the city of Linfen was? Let’s redirect all of our coal pollution into Harley’s town until we get the same effect. If it’s good enough for China, it’s good enough for us! (And no, Harley, you don’t get to move away.)
    So easy to tout the benefits when you don’t have to suffer the drawbacks, isn’t it?

  11. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Good ’toon, and dead accurate, Matt.

  12. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    So you are using well they do it, as good reasoning? We clean up our mess we offer it to them. Better than not doing it. And China is also building and selling solar power as well. We just need to get them into the st century without the awful pollution.

  13. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Killing coal, oil and methane. We can do it and still produce the energy. Even better when we cut our waste of that energy by 75%.

  14. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Seems to be the fossil fuel weenies who demand their over the top profits regardless of the huge cost they leave us now and more so later.

  15. Engolfed81

    Engolfed81 said, about 2 years ago


    Got that right!

  16. Load the rest of the comments (12).