|
Post by Triassic on Feb 1, 2007 6:17:39 GMT -5
Yep. We're gonna be burning oil for a long, long time yet. But there's still a hell of a lot that could be done to reduce waste and to make us less totally reliant on oil; solar, wind, and tide power could and should be used more effectively.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2007 12:05:03 GMT -5
Birds? You expect me to worry about thousands of birds dying when there are a few billion of them? There is a simple solution I'm sure. Like tape on new windows. Birds learn. Oil is the worst idea to ever enter our greedy little minds and we need to make real progress not more research or impact studies....We need to change now. We shouldn't be using food as an energy source when we still have starvation on the scale we do. We shouldn't even bother with Nuclear power.
The one bright idea I have seen lately is a power generator being designed in down under. These tall towers filled with water and surrounding the base are huge mirrors used to direct and focus sun light to boil the water the steam is used to spin turbines....
Drop water power generators. They use gravity and water pressure to spin turbines...
Every stupid source of power we have now is replaceable by a clean responsible solution we just lack the leaders and the nerve.
SUVs suck.
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on Feb 1, 2007 13:44:26 GMT -5
It's not that we lack leaders or the nerve, hell, we don't really lack anything...it's money that is the problem...if there is something that everyone wants to blame it's money and our current sytem of trade and barter amongst humankind. Either the right people don't have enough money to fix it, or the wrong people want to keep all of the money they have. It generally works like that in our lives too, regarding accessability and civil rights.
I'm just surprised no one has found or thought of a way (at least that I've heard of) to use the natural magneticism on Earth as a power source.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2007 14:43:21 GMT -5
Money=Power. Power=money.
Who has the power? Oil companies.
|
|
|
Post by E on Feb 1, 2007 15:02:38 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2007 15:43:37 GMT -5
LOL The only reason fossil fuels are so much cheaper is because we are so entrenched in their use the infrastructure is in place. If the people demanded an immediate infusion of billions of dollars in cleaner fuels and to develop the infrastructure the costs would drop.
And you cant ask me to believe that digging out coal, shipping oil from hostile countries, refinement...OPEC production cuts...would be cheaper.
The States just dropped what? 1 trillion? on Iraq....Yeah yeah yeah they went in because Saddam was a Tyrant. If they didn't have billions of barrels of oil buried under their sand would the States even bother?
And that link E is a perfect example. The Vietnam war didn't teach them not to fuck with people on their own soil. But rather control the media so the people aren't exposed to the real costs. The media in Vietnam was irresponsible, biased bullshit but the people saw what was happening.
|
|
|
Post by jenny on Feb 1, 2007 17:38:13 GMT -5
That's a good link, E. I wish they'd kept it updated in 2006.
|
|
may
New Member
Posts: 5
|
Post by may on Feb 1, 2007 17:40:30 GMT -5
my brother is over there we may not like the war but we all neeed to rescpet and suppoert our troops
|
|
|
Post by E on Feb 1, 2007 17:41:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jenny on Feb 1, 2007 18:11:18 GMT -5
After 9/11, I started walking a mile a day. I had a list of people who were killed on 9/11 and every time I did my mile, I thought of that person. I lasted maybe two weeks. The weight of all that sorrow was too much for me. And I realized that even if I walked every day, it would take me nearly ten years to complete the list.
|
|
|
Post by Pony on Feb 1, 2007 19:57:36 GMT -5
1st....Great links from The E-man!! That's exactly the kinda thing this administration is doing to steer the sheep - absolutely deceptive and wrong!!
2nd....i LOVE our troops, and hate they've been put in this situation. If you speak out against this, then you are "unpatriotic." It's more of the bullshit!!
3rd....i heard tonight that Exxon Mobil made nearly $40 Billion last year - more than any company in history!!! Just the facts, mame!!
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on Feb 1, 2007 21:57:07 GMT -5
Nuclear power (and natural chemical power) is a positive prospect, but can be tricky to deal with...if we could find a way to use the waste that comes from Nuclear power...we'd be in energy utopia...if we could harvest raw atoms for power and wield unlimited command over them, we'd have the capability to power nearly anything, and do almost anything. It just sucks that the waste is hazardous to humans currently, and synthesis of the materials is very difficult to do.
I also support the troops...I was even initially (and in ways I still am...but not like the main people are) a proponent of the conflict. Eliminating the power of Saddam Hussein was not anything regrettable in my opinion. I think strategically, the plans were flawed from the start, and I predicted something would happen like this even prior to the war begining (actually, since 2000).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2007 22:29:23 GMT -5
Are you people serious? The new stockpile the States is making in Nevada costs billions...it is very deep, took years to build....and it wont even store all the existing stockpile of waste. So if this stuff isn't as dangerous as everyone says it is....why is it encased in lead, sealed in special barrels and then buried deep in lead lined mines?
"In the United States, geothermal electrical facilities in California, Hawaii, Nevada and Utah had generated about $1 billion of electricity in 2000 which is equivalent to about 60 million barrels of oil, making geothermal energy the third largest source of renewable energy in the U.S., after hydroelectric energy and bioenergy. In January 2000, the United States government announced a program to develop geothermal energy in the western states. They plan to generate 10 percent of that region’s electricity with geothermal technology by the year 2020.
Geothermal facilities that generate electricity claim an average standby efficiency rate of 97%, compared with 65% for nuclear reactors and 75% for coal plants. New facilities emit 0.1 kg of carbon per megawatt-hour of electricity generated, compared with 185 kg of carbon per megawatt-hour for a coal-fired facility."
So why only 10%?
|
|
|
Post by jenny on Feb 2, 2007 6:21:21 GMT -5
If you look over your shoulder, you can see the Chinese catching up with a mad push for industrialization. The Chinese appetite for energy and disregard for environmental consequences have been disregarded by the American media. That's another factor in the energy wars.
|
|
|
Post by Ouch on Feb 2, 2007 10:15:34 GMT -5
Nobody was saying nuclear power was 'healthy' so to speak...but it doesn't directly contribute to atmospheric disruption. That was the whole point I was making, it would be great if we could use nuclear power without it becoming a hazard to us.
Obviously you don't send in an army to take down one singular person, I just mentioned I thought it was a good side effect. Unfortunately there are treaties that have been signed that disallow the assassination of political personel of a country. I'm sure Mossad would've jumped on the opportunity like starving, rabid dogs otherwise (along with Arafat, the president of Iran, and enemies in Lebanon and Syria). Personally, I think the best way would be to empower the U.N. to deal with Saddam Hussein and people like him...but the U.N. generally has flubbed up any sort of chance at doing things like that...and are remarkably useless.
To be fair, the nest was stirred a great deal earlier before George Bush (both of them, even)...there's been bad blood since the days of Richard and Saladin. Moving up to World War One, is when the stuff we're dealing with today started to become a real issue though. Strangely enough, the Ottomans were probably a good thing for that region, provided stability...and they shared the same overall views as the citizens of the empire. Once England had control of the region, the anti-western views began the form...and it pretty much went downhill from there.
jenny puts the nail on the coffin, though...the Chinese I am worried about more than chaos in the Middle East. Especially as of recent with their test of a satellite destroying weapon. If the 'western' worlds (a.k.a NATO (along with a few others)) relations with China go sour, that, has the frightening potential of stirring up a gigantic World War III, a war which would probably not end until one side was completely obliterated or subjugated.
|
|