• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michelle Obama has new warning on obesity

Kelzie said:
I know. And I was mostly....tweakin at ya too. I do thank you for your tax dollars though! ;)

I do think sometimes the government needs to protect us from the market. My biggest worry right now is our dependence on oil. It's not going to last forever. And I don't trust the market to provide a solution quickly enough. If the government can plan ahead and come up with some feasible alternatives through subsidies or what have you, I'm down with that.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. It might surprise people to know (or maybe not) that the national college debate topic in 1977-78 was (following several Whereas points) Resolved: That the US government should explore independence from foreign oil.

There is a reason (beyond corporate greed) that we are still reliant on fossil fuels. Plain and simply put, there simply is not a better fuel alternative. Ive read some things about H3...some other more potent fuels, but unless we are ready to embrace nuclear power...right now...well...this is it.
 
SheWolf said:
I am going to invest in most of that stuff... my next car will be a fuel efficient hybrid. I have more research to do (model, cost, etc).. but some areas where I live, that stuff is really popular so it might depend on your location.
Click to expand...

'Popular' is a relative term. EVERYONE wants to be green (honestly...as a sportsman I dont know of a SINGLE person that enjoys polution and I dont know too many environmentalists that enjoy the outdoors more), but the reality is that some of the green ideas are fine...some are great...but right now...most of them are just pipe.

not that ANy of this is topical...way to derail a thread Kelzie... ;)
Even though it is still a fossil fuel, CNG has been proven efficient since the 70's...its just a pain in the ass to drag around a huge heavy tank.
 
VanceMack said:
'Popular' is a relative term. EVERYONE wants to be green (honestly...as a sportsman I dont know of a SINGLE person that enjoys polution and I dont know too many environmentalists that enjoy the outdoors more), but the reality is that some of the green ideas are fine...some are great...but right now...most of them are just pipe.

not that ANy of this is topical...way to derail a thread Kelzie... ;)
Even though it is still a fossil fuel, CNG has been proven efficient since the 70's...its just a pain in the ass to drag around a huge heavy tank.
Click to expand...

Crap. Anyway, about those fat kids....
 
VanceMack said:
I hear ya. It might surprise people to know (or maybe not) that the national college debate topic in 1977-78 was (following several Whereas points) Resolved: That the US government should explore independence from foreign oil.

There is a reason (beyond corporate greed) that we are still reliant on fossil fuels. Plain and simply put, there simply is not a better fuel alternative. Ive read some things about H3...some other more potent fuels, but unless we are ready to embrace nuclear power...right now...well...this is it.
Click to expand...

3H (tritium) and 2H (deuterium) together can be a source of fuel for nuclear fusion, as can He-3 (helium-3). Unfortunately, fusion has not yet shown to be an energy-positive reaction, our current methods of initiating fusion require more energy than we get out of it. He-3 has availability problems, it's rare on earth. Deuterium is easy to get, a gallon of seawater will have the equivalent energy of hundreds of gallons of gasoline, and there's no shortage of seawater. Tritium is radioactive but can be produced by bombarding lithium with neutrons. (and you get energy out of that reaction too)

Nuclear fission is, for now, the only source of energy that is dense enough and doesn't involve fossil fuels. Fusion will be great if we can figure it out, but until then we need to stop being so terrified of nuclear waste from the nuclear plants we can build now. People get this idea that radioactive waste consists of leaky, dripping barrels of green goo like you see on The Simpsons. It's not particularly dangerous stuff, and we could even reprocess 99% of it as usable fuel if we weren't so terrified of possible proliferation.
 
Kelzie said:
I know. And I was mostly....tweakin at ya too. I do thank you for your tax dollars though! ;)

I do think sometimes the government needs to protect us from the market. My biggest worry right now is our dependence on oil. It's not going to last forever. And I don't trust the market to provide a solution quickly enough. If the government can plan ahead and come up with some feasible alternatives through subsidies or what have you, I'm down with that.
Click to expand...

If green energy is the obvious and wonderful choice, why hasn't the market taken it and run with it? Because it sucks, perhaps? The technology isn't reliable enough to make ti practical?
 
apdst said:
If green energy is the obvious and wonderful choice, why hasn't the market taken it and run with it? Because it sucks, perhaps? The technology isn't reliable enough to make ti practical?
Click to expand...

Costs more dollars per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels.
"The market" tends to not think much beyond that.
 
apdst said:
If green energy is the obvious and wonderful choice, why hasn't the market taken it and run with it? Because it sucks, perhaps? The technology isn't reliable enough to make ti practical?
Click to expand...

What Deuce said.
 
Deuce said:
Costs more dollars per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels.
"The market" tends to not think much beyond that.
Click to expand...

And that is one of the problems with the market. The market has many good features, but things like this keep it from be the cure all to all problems.
 
Deuce said:
Costs more dollars per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels.
"The market" tends to not think much beyond that.
Click to expand...

I agree with this for the most part but I have to ask why this is?

Why doesn’t the market more aggressively pursue and research alternative sources? If there is enough money to be made for someone who invests the time and money to find a solution, seems to me there would be a bigger push in the private sector.

I agree with government subsidies when they work but the problem, as I see it, is that they often don’t work and create more problems in the long run and then they are nearly impossible to stop (government inefficiency...ie ethanol).
 
Deuce said:
3H (tritium) and 2H (deuterium) together can be a source of fuel for nuclear fusion, as can He-3 (helium-3). Unfortunately, fusion has not yet shown to be an energy-positive reaction, our current methods of initiating fusion require more energy than we get out of it. He-3 has availability problems, it's rare on earth. Deuterium is easy to get, a gallon of seawater will have the equivalent energy of hundreds of gallons of gasoline, and there's no shortage of seawater. Tritium is radioactive but can be produced by bombarding lithium with neutrons. (and you get energy out of that reaction too)

Nuclear fission is, for now, the only source of energy that is dense enough and doesn't involve fossil fuels. Fusion will be great if we can figure it out, but until then we need to stop being so terrified of nuclear waste from the nuclear plants we can build now. People get this idea that radioactive waste consists of leaky, dripping barrels of green goo like you see on The Simpsons. It's not particularly dangerous stuff, and we could even reprocess 99% of it as usable fuel if we weren't so terrified of possible proliferation.
Click to expand...

I actually read somewhere that they had found (or believed) that there were significant deposits of H3 on the moon and that if they believed it could be as potent and viable as they thought, then it might trigger a new space race and moon missions.

maybe part of the problem is that whole Jeff Foxworthy southern accent thing...if Bush didnt walk around all time calling it nookular then people wouldnt think that was the type of guy going to be in charge of the programs! ;)
 
GPS_Flex said:
I agree with this for the most part but I have to ask why this is?

Why doesn’t the market more aggressively pursue and research alternative sources? If there is enough money to be made for someone who invests the time and money to find a solution, seems to me there would be a bigger push in the private sector.

I agree with government subsidies when they work but the problem, as I see it, is that they often don’t work and create more problems in the long run and then they are nearly impossible to stop (government inefficiency...ie ethanol).
Click to expand...

Its a risk versus a know comodity. The market is not so big on risk while money is still to made with the known. To pursue alternatives requires a major outlay of exopense and with little certainy of success, it is slow coming, and those out lay costs have to be made up, making anything that did work out, expensive to start with.
 
apdst said:
If green energy is the obvious and wonderful choice, why hasn't the market taken it and run with it? Because it sucks, perhaps? The technology isn't reliable enough to make ti practical?
Click to expand...

The thing about green energy...it doesnt HAVE to all be about battery powered cars (and BTW...you wanna talk disposable battery nightmares...).

They are doing great things with skylights right now that could eliminate the need for daytime electrical lighting. more efficient insulation would help both in winter and in summer. Radiant heat uses tubing and oil to heat rooms...it takes less energy to heat and the effect of the heat lasts longer. Better windows...better constructed and insulated doors. Heck...convincing folks to open windows in their homes and their cars...getting used to slightly higher temps. LOTS of different things that are viable.

But at the end of the day...fossil fuels still rule. What I wish people would do is get off their anti or pro fossil fuel bent and focus on things like more efficient polution controls for those systems.
 
Deuce said:
Costs more dollars per kilowatt-hour than fossil fuels.
"The market" tends to not think much beyond that.
Click to expand...

It doesnt just cost more...its not as efficient. And often the costs are overinflated because they know you stick a 'green' sticker on something and some sucker is going to buy it.

and on that note...Ive still got about 45 peoples worth of carbon credits for all you evil consumers of electricity with a guilty conscience. If you want to buy your way into carbon neutrality...call me. I'll even send you a picture of 'your' trees. But if you want to go on living with the guilt and self loathing of knowing you are destroying the planet and killing children...then...hey...I guess you are on your own...
 
VanceMack said:
It doesnt just cost more...its not as efficient. And often the costs are overinflated because they know you stick a 'green' sticker on something and some sucker is going to buy it.

and on that note...Ive still got about 45 peoples worth of carbon credits for all you evil consumers of electricity with a guilty conscience. If you want to buy your way into carbon neutrality...call me. I'll even send you a picture of 'your' trees. But if you want to go on living with the guilt and self loathing of knowing you are destroying the planet and killing children...then...hey...I guess you are on your own...
Click to expand...

Well, it's kind of the same thing, as far as the market is concerned. A pure market wouldn't care at all if a process was inefficient as long as the product that you did get from it was cheaper than an alternative efficient but more expensive process.

Like the capture rate of solar panels is pretty dismal last I checked. Wouldn't much matter if it cost $.50/square foot.

But, my biggest concern is that if we wait until the market declares alternatives energies comparable to fossil fuel sources, oil will be so prohibitively that our economy grinds to a halt. Remember back when it was close to $4/gallon for gas?
 
Boo Radley said:
Its a risk versus a know comodity. The market is not so big on risk while money is still to made with the known. To pursue alternatives requires a major outlay of exopense and with little certainy of success, it is slow coming, and those out lay costs have to be made up, making anything that did work out, expensive to start with.
Click to expand...

Well, I sincerely appreciate the response but I was looking for something a little beyond economics 101. I don’t mean to sound derogatory when I say that either.

I’m not an expert in alternative fuels but I’m just curious if anyone is aware of burdensome government restrictions on the development of alternative fuels for example.

I did a little searching on my own and found that the EPA has a boatload of restrictions on fuels that can be used so I can imagine that would be an inhibitor to research. I’d be pretty ticked off if I spent millions developing fuel from something like algae, only to have the EPA say it was too harmful to the environment.
 
Kelzie said:
Well, it's kind of the same thing, as far as the market is concerned. A pure market wouldn't care at all if a process was inefficient as long as the product that you did get from it was cheaper than an alternative efficient but more expensive process.

Like the capture rate of solar panels is pretty dismal last I checked. Wouldn't much matter if it cost $.50/square foot.

But, my biggest concern is that if we wait until the market declares alternatives energies comparable to fossil fuel sources, oil will be so prohibitively that our economy grinds to a halt. Remember back when it was close to $4/gallon for gas?
Click to expand...

I do...but there really isnt a reason for the gas prices to go so high (more about that in a sec). We have so MUCH fuel that we havent even begun to access. And for all the environmental bull****, most of it is in places that NO ONE goes to. I swear...every time a shovel is put into the ground, an environmentalist loses their wings...And IF there is a finite amount of global oil, there is kind of a benefit to draining all of THEIRS before we get to OURS...but there is certainly a benefit to using ours, as well as natural gas resources.

now...heres the thing...what is milk...$4 a gallon? And when you think about what is required to GET gasoline...oil is cheap as hell here! It may shock people but gas in the middle east is significantly higher than what it costs us in America. And MUCH of what we pay is actually in the form of taxes.
 
Objective Voice said:
Sorry about that...

Go here...Local Harvest.

Curious...How did this thread migrate from obesity and nutrition to nuclear fussion? Let's bring it back, people.
Click to expand...

Kelzie keeps threadjacking... ;)

or...

we tried that, and people are bored with the nutrition part. But polite folk are having a side discussion...so...feel free to ignore this part...and press on with the nutrition aspect...
 
Objective Voice said:
Curious...How did this thread migrate from obesity and nutrition to nuclear fussion? Let's bring it back, people.
Click to expand...


It was totally off topic by the time I joined in but I couldn’t help chiming in on the renewable energy topic. My apologies for taking part in the derailing of the original topic herein.

Perhaps a mod can split the thread?
 
VanceMack said:
I do...but there really isnt a reason for the gas prices to go so high (more about that in a sec). We have so MUCH fuel that we havent even begun to access. And for all the environmental bull****, most of it is in places that NO ONE goes to. I swear...every time a shovel is put into the ground, an environmentalist loses their wings...And IF there is a finite amount of global oil, there is kind of a benefit to draining all of THEIRS before we get to OURS...but there is certainly a benefit to using ours, as well as natural gas resources.

now...heres the thing...what is milk...$4 a gallon? And when you think about what is required to GET gasoline...oil is cheap as hell here! It may shock people but gas in the middle east is significantly higher than what it costs us in America. And MUCH of what we pay is actually in the form of taxes.
Click to expand...

Not from what I've been reading. We've got another couple decades of cheap oil. The the reserves get dramatically more expensive to access.

I like the gas prices in Europe. I actually think our government should start raising the tax on gas to slowly wean us off of it. But I'm a liberal. :shrug:
 
VanceMack said:
Kelzie keeps threadjacking... ;)

or...

we tried that, and people are bored with the nutrition part. But polite folk are having a side discussion...so...feel free to ignore this part...and press on with the nutrition aspect...
Click to expand...

Damn it! :lol:
 
I asked my Mom about her view on the whole 'child obesity school-food new threat' thing and she said
"What the hell have they been spending all of our tax money on for all these years? Slop in a bucket? nails on a board? Holy ****, what the ****?"

:rofl
Pure gold!
 
Kelzie said:
Not from what I've been reading. We've got another couple decades of cheap oil. The the reserves get dramatically more expensive to access.

I like the gas prices in Europe. I actually think our government should start raising the tax on gas to slowly wean us off of it. But I'm a liberal. :shrug:
Click to expand...


Just don't vote for such tax increases until the economy starts pulling out of this current slump ok? Higher gas prices raise the price of everything and some of us are REALLY struggling to make ends meet right now.
 
Kelzie said:
Not from what I've been reading. We've got another couple decades of cheap oil. The the reserves get dramatically more expensive to access.

I like the gas prices in Europe. I actually think our government should start raising the tax on gas to slowly wean us off of it. But I'm a liberal. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Did that work for Europe? People are still terribly dependent on it over there on it, too - but because they've been built on a foot-traffic layout it's not quite as necessary. Do you remember when gas was high the other year? Only the people who could afford the more expensive fuel efficient vehicles bought them. . . .and what about those of us who live in small towns and don't make a lot of money?

We surely couldn't afford the higher prices - nor could we just stay in our town and flourish somehow. It really strained people thin - and many people couldn't pull things together.

Higher gas prices is one of the many reasons why our economy crumbled, as well.
 
The government 'budding' in on marriage. Good. The government making a lot of flyers telling people to eat healthy. Bad. Americans really deserve the government we get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom