• 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!

Obama Wants Research to Wean Vehicles off Oil.....

Cephus said:
Which part? The car part or the disability part?
Click to expand...

Both. Definition of "poor", number of cars, means through which those cars were purchased, price at which they were purchased, and full demographics of "many" disabled. Just the stats and facts. I'm interested to see the breakdown.
 
Catawba said:
Exactly, you decide whether you want to pay half as much for your power over a 25 year period while both lowering the grid load and reducing the cause of global warming.
Click to expand...

I don't believe we are contributing in any large part to global warming. I think the lefts hijacking of the green energy movement and the science of climatology have done more damage to the legitimate study of Global climate change and renewable energy than ANY Global Warming Naysayer.

They lost ALL credibility when they used scare tactics to create a new tax called, "carbon credits". Yes. give the liberals money and they will save the world.

Second, if " global warming " were such a concern then why not direct all legitimate tech to applications THAT WORK. Hydrogen Fuel cells output H2O.

Like I said, photovoltaic with the exception of maybe a calculator is a waste of money. I know EXACTLY how a full home solar rig works, down to the components in the inverter. It's a old technology and hasn't made ANY significant gains in the last 60 years that would make it a credible alternative.

Germany built a 2 Gig Solar power plant.
It's takes care of 5% of their grid load, but Germans get to pay and extra 10% surcharge for it's construction and upkeep. Stupid.

The misnomer of " generating your own power " as a alternative to paying monthly for electricity isn't about saving the earth, it's about blindly adhering to a corrupt ideology.

A correctly built home, with an automated Energy Management System ( The New ones are adaptive, " They Learn over time and improve " ) to allow in fresh air depending on indoor enthalpy and CO2 LEVELS, with high SEER multistage AC systems with variable capacity and ECM fan motors that not only control temperature but control humidity, with LED Light Fixtures and high efficiency gas appliances is far more efficient than any solar rig set up.

If you want to capitalize on the SEER rating then you can even go GEO-THERMAL to save even more money. A guy west of Houston just built a 10 million dollar Garage with over a 100 tons of Geo-thermal AC units. Filled the garage with million dollar MOPARS.


Technology THAT WORKS..
 
FreedomFromAll said:
The odd thing is that I didnt make any claims about either being a replacement for anything. I said that I thought about converting my truck but batteries are too expensive and suck. I then showed a link and suggested that a hybrid would be the better option.

I didnt even mention solar. But if I had I would have pointed out that solar power runs into the same exact problem of batteries.

So yes with current technology is lacking in application. The main problem that I see with power generation is huge centralized power plants that must build very inefficient power lines to deliver the power far from the power plants location. Power generation should be decreased in size and increased in numbers. That way it would less likely result in massive power failures.

But no Ev's and solar are not going to replace the power grid or the combustion engine just yet. But it should be obvious that eventual something will replace todays technologies with something better. No reason to get stuck on current trends though.
Click to expand...

It won't be Solar and or battery power or wind energy that does it.

And with Fracking the whole narrative of running " out of oil" has been made just a little more illegitimate.

Power lines are more efficient than you think. The loss in a conductor isn't due to high voltages, it's due to high amperage. So when you "step-up"voltage " through electro-magnetic induction you reduce amps, when you need the POWER, it's stepped down at sub-stations and then again before it enters you neighborhood, your block or your building.

It's why the run anywhere from 770kv to 400 kv through the Transmission lines and then step that down substation to 200 kv then down to 14kv and then down to single phase 240 for a home or 3 phase 480 or 240 for large buildings and power plants.

Voltages are high to keep amperage low and to keep power loss to a minimum at the power plant.

Here's the formula for power loss through transmission lines.....I2R...

As far as dependability in my area which is very close to a large metropolitan city, I can't remember the last time we lost power.
 
Fenton said:
I don't believe we are contributing in any large part to global warming..
Click to expand...

Then you have lost all credibility on the issue. I suggest you vote for the anti-science party!
 
Fenton said:
It won't be Solar and or battery power or wind energy that does it.

And with Fracking the whole narrative of running " out of oil" has been made just a little more illegitimate.

Power lines are more efficient than you think. The loss in a conductor isn't due to high voltages, it's due to high amperage. So when you "step-up"voltage " through electro-magnetic induction you reduce amps, when you need the POWER, it's stepped down at sub-stations and then again before it enters you neighborhood, your block or your building.

It's why the run anywhere from 770kv to 400 kv through the Transmission lines and then step that down substation to 200 kv then down to 14kv and then down to single phase 240 for a home or 3 phase 480 or 240 for large buildings and power plants.

Voltages are high to keep amperage low and to keep power loss to a minimum at the power plant.

Here's the formula for power loss through transmission lines.....I2R...

As far as dependability in my area which is very close to a large metropolitan city, I can't remember the last time we lost power.
Click to expand...

Look up the term Electrical Resistance. There is a 1-10% power loss in long distance high voltage power transmission do to resistance. Doesn't sound like much but it adds up pretty fast and any loss is a loss. And also because we are talking about a very large scale so 1-10% accounts for huge losses.

So no they are not more efficient than I think. And thanx for the very simplistic explanation but I am already aware how power distribution works. I grew up near a river (Clackamas) that had several hydroelectric dams it was the standard in my school district that in science class we learned all about power production. Plus it helps that I have some schooling in that field.

And I was referring to major power outages, not local disruptions. Things like blackouts and rolling blackouts because the power grid is archaic. Like the one that happened February 8th and 9th this year in the northeastern US because of that nor'easter. 650,000 customers were without power.


Last year Alone saw Millions of Americans without power. There was the Northeast Blackout of 1965 and things really are not better than then they are actually worse, and in that one 30 million customers were without power. Its a matter of national security and the realization that old technology isnt going to cut it in a modern world.
 
Catawba said:
When we give a tax break we are voluntarily reducing our income. If you wish to call it elimination of a tax break instead of eliminating a subsidy, so be it.

Its one of those tomato/tomato semantics arguments.
Click to expand...

More like a tomato/turnip or a tomato/slice of ham.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Look up the term Electrical Resistance. There is a 1-10% power loss in long distance high voltage power transmission do to resistance. Doesn't sound like much but it adds up pretty fast and any loss is a loss. And also because we are talking about a very large scale so 1-10% accounts for huge losses.

So no they are not more efficient than I think. And thanx for the very simplistic explanation but I am already aware how power distribution works. I grew up near a river (Clackamas) that had several hydroelectric dams it was the standard in my school district that in science class we learned all about power production. Plus it helps that I have some schooling in that field.

And I was referring to major power outages, not local disruptions. Things like blackouts and rolling blackouts because the power grid is archaic. Like the one that happened February 8th and 9th this year in the northeastern US because of that nor'easter. 650,000 customers were without power.


Last year Alone saw Millions of Americans without power. There was the Northeast Blackout of 1965 and things really are not better than then they are actually worse, and in that one 30 million customers were without power. Its a matter of national security and the realization that old technology isnt going to cut it in a modern world.
Click to expand...

The math for calculating basic power loss is simplistic, but usually when explaining electrical principles I try to keep it somewhat simple.

Not everyone has the experience and education I have built up over 30 years of practical applications in everything from 3 mega watt generators to troubleshooting surface mount components on PCB boards to designing and installing Energy Management Systems for medium to large office buildings and industrial plants.

You want to increase the technical aspect of this debate ? Go ahead, I'll wait.

And you want ME to look up "electrical resistance " ? Talk about simplistic.

And living next to a hydro-electrical damn serves no educational purpose and it takes a bit more effort than selective osmosis to understand electricity.

We of-course do not live in a perfect world where the fundamental laws of physics change according to our personal ideologies and beliefs. We are A LONG way away from using super conductive materials in any practical application.

So we use the level of technology available to engineer the most effective and efficient power grids with a understanding that some losses are to be expected. A 1 to 10% loss in transmission lines is a acceptable variable if the alternatives are Solar and or wind power which are both highly over rated and a poor attempt to live up to a corrupt narrative that fossil fuels are evil and will destroy our planet.

Power loss is a understood consequences of large grids and anyone who cries about the rare loss of power or power loss after a storm really has only themselves to blame.

Whole home generators that run on very cheap natural gas are a GREAT investment.
 
Fenton said:
The math for calculating basic power loss is simplistic, but usually when explaining electrical principles I try to keep it somewhat simple.

Not everyone has the experience and education I have built up over 30 years of practical applications in everything from 3 mega watt generators to troubleshooting surface mount components on PCB boards to designing and installing Energy Management Systems for medium to large office buildings and industrial plants.

You want to increase the technical aspect of this debate ? Go ahead, I'll wait.

And you want ME to look up "electrical resistance " ? Talk about simplistic.

And living next to a hydro-electrical damn serves no educational purpose and it takes a bit more effort than selective osmosis to understand electricity.

We of-course do not live in a perfect world where the fundamental laws of physics change according to our personal ideologies and beliefs. We are A LONG way away from using super conductive materials in any practical application.

So we use the level of technology available to engineer the most effective and efficient power grids with a understanding that some losses are to be expected. A 1 to 10% loss in transmission lines is a acceptable variable if the alternatives are Solar and or wind power which are both highly over rated and a poor attempt to live up to a corrupt narrative that fossil fuels are evil and will destroy our planet.

Power loss is a understood consequences of large grids and anyone who cries about the rare loss of power or power loss after a storm really has only themselves to blame.

Whole home generators that run on very cheap natural gas are a GREAT investment.
Click to expand...

I see so your only real point is to dis solar and EV's which is fine if thats what you want to do. But after a point it gets kind of repetitive.


Whats rather funny though is that you didnt mention resistance at all and went with pointless math to make a pointless claim. If you truly do know all about the then you should be well aware of this countries current lack of a adequate power transmission infrastructure.

U.S. energy infrastructure grade rises — to D+ - Electric Light & Power


A grade of D indicates that the country's energy infrastructure is "poor" or "at risk."
A council of ASCE members assigns the grades according to the following eight criteria: capacity, condition, funding, future need, operation, maintenance, public safety, resilience and innovation.



And you were saying?

Oh yea you were crying about wind and solar.

Conclusion and recommendations
Looking ahead in the 21st century, the nation is increasingly adopting technologies that will automate the electric grid and help manage congestion points. In turn, this will require robust integration of transmission and distribution systems so that the network continues to be reliable.
Investments in the grid, select pipeline systems, and new technologies have helped alleviate congestion problems in recent years, but capacity and an aging system will be issues in the long term. In addition, with an automated, dynamic energy grid system comes the increased risk of cybersecurity threats. Protecting the nation’s energy delivery systems from cyber attacks and ensuring that these systems can recover is vital to national security and economic well-being.
· Adopt a national energy policy that anticipates and adapts to future energy needs and promotes the development of sustainable energy sources, while increasing the efficiency of energy use, promoting conservation, and decreasing dependence on fossil fuels as sources are depleted. Such a policy must be adaptable and scalable to local and state policy.
· Provide mechanisms for timely approval of transmission lines to minimize the time from preliminary planning to operation.
· Identify and prioritize risks to energy security, and develop standards and guidelines for managing those risks.
· Design and construct additional transmission grid infrastructure to efficiently deliver power from remote geographic generation sources to developed regions that have the greatest demand requirements.
· Create incentives to promote energy conservation and the concurrent development and installation of highly efficient coal, natural gas, nuclear, and renewable (solar, wind, hydro, biomass, and geothermal) generation.
· Continue research to improve and enhance the nation’s transmission and generation infrastructure as well as the deployment of technologies such as smart grid, real-time forecasting for transmission capacity, and sustainable energy generation which provide a reasonable return on investment.
The ASCE, founded in 1852, is the country's oldest national civil engineering organization. It represents more than 140,000 civil engineers in private practice, government, industry, and academia who are dedicated to advancing the science and profession of civil engineering.
 
I haven't been able to stick my nose in for a while - kind of busy with work the last few days.

BUT: I would like to guerrilla post and run back to work, my apologies up front.

Since I am usually the guy who has to sign the cheque for my/our decisions, I think (or at least hope) I look at things objectively rather than dogmatically. Doesn't mean I can't or won't do things idealistically, realizing the consequences (as much as possible).

EVs are not a good thing or a bad thing, they are just another thing. They will NEVER replace major bits of our transportation infrastructure with the technologies we currently have or reasonably expect to have. Doesn't mean we should not develop them. Not fair to hide behind their lack of success as "new" tech, because one must remember that they have been around for about 120 years. While they ARE (IMHO) an excellent choice for urban commuting, I still have to stand back and ask why the hell we are urban commuting in the first place? This is a bandaid fix over a horrible open wound - but realistically one that can be put to work in a hurry, so why not? There are two things one SHOULD have for urban EVs: off peak charging (FORGET this BS about 5 minute charges - we DO NOT have the daytime capacity to do so, and will not likely unless we really start to smarten up energy use) and alternative & sustainable stand-alone charging. In other words, in my perfect world, you would only be able to charge your EV in daytime with solar or wind resources OFF GRID. Don't like it (or can't afford it) STAY HOME (and do the first truly energy conservative thing since the discussion began).

I get a laugh out of the civil eng society grading grid or other infrastructure reliability. I have to remind myself that these are the people who have been the technical resource behind all infrastructure design and development since day one, and the same idiots who put rebar into concrete (guaranteeing its failure - amongst so many other stupid things). As with so many other things, this is one part of pubic utilities that was allowed to develop with very little forethought. This kind of knee-jerk engineering is what backs us into a bad corner. All of the little tweeks here and there will not solve this problem until there is a wholesale conceptual shift into how to construct a transmission backbone to which regional distribution and generation will interface only without risk to the transmission side (the so-called "smart" grid in the extreme). Devising transportation solutions that add to this already overtaxed and under-engineered mish-mash is a really, REALLY bad way to go. Thus my comments in the last paragraph about how to charge you EV.

BTW: there are two levels of things that fail when the lights go out: the transmission system (where the high voltage part of the grid can't deal with a major disruption in generation or distribution) and much more commonly the distribution system itself. The latter is one case where our penchant to do the cheapest thing we can (responding to "market" forces, rather than seeking quality solutions - thnk WalMart and China here). We lose so much power after a storm because we have so much overhead distribution. While it is far more expensive, there are a dozen or so major advantages to underground distribution lines that can provide infinitely better reliability from storm damage. But, we'd rather go to WalMart (figuratively, of course) and buy overhead line.

So, to refer back to the topic of the thread: I see this kind of mindless, political posturing as typical of the half-baked, knee-jerk reaction to a problem rather than a well thought out approach to "eaning cars off of oil". Obama will do just as every administration before him has done: build another really stupid bureaucracy that the THINK will load the pork barrel up in exchange for some more votes next time around. At the citizen level: there have been EXREMELY efficient cars available since WWII - but Americans have bought barely a tny fraction of one percent of their fleet from such sources. Instead, look at the parking lot at the mall or Wally-world - or better yet look at the really big parking lot we call "freeways" in the morning metro commute - THERE is your real problem.
 
Last edited:
FreedomFromAll said:
I see so your only real point is to dis solar and EV's which is fine if thats what you want to do. But after a point it gets kind of repetitive.


Whats rather funny though is that you didnt mention resistance at all and went with pointless math to make a pointless claim. If you truly do know all about the then you should be well aware of this countries current lack of a adequate power transmission infrastructure.

U.S. energy infrastructure grade rises — to D+ - Electric Light & Power


A grade of D indicates that the country's energy infrastructure is "poor" or "at risk."
A council of ASCE members assigns the grades according to the following eight criteria: capacity, condition, funding, future need, operation, maintenance, public safety, resilience and innovation.



And you were saying?

Oh yea you were crying about wind and solar.

Conclusion and recommendations
Looking ahead in the 21st century, the nation is increasingly adopting technologies that will automate the electric grid and help manage congestion points. In turn, this will require robust integration of transmission and distribution systems so that the network continues to be reliable.
Investments in the grid, select pipeline systems, and new technologies have helped alleviate congestion problems in recent years, but capacity and an aging system will be issues in the long term. In addition, with an automated, dynamic energy grid system comes the increased risk of cybersecurity threats. Protecting the nation’s energy delivery systems from cyber attacks and ensuring that these systems can recover is vital to national security and economic well-being.
· Adopt a national energy policy that anticipates and adapts to future energy needs and promotes the development of sustainable energy sources, while increasing the efficiency of energy use, promoting conservation, and decreasing dependence on fossil fuels as sources are depleted. Such a policy must be adaptable and scalable to local and state policy.
· Provide mechanisms for timely approval of transmission lines to minimize the time from preliminary planning to operation.
· Identify and prioritize risks to energy security, and develop standards and guidelines for managing those risks.
· Design and construct additional transmission grid infrastructure to efficiently deliver power from remote geographic generation sources to developed regions that have the greatest demand requirements.
· Create incentives to promote energy conservation and the concurrent development and installation of highly efficient coal, natural gas, nuclear, and renewable (solar, wind, hydro, biomass, and geothermal) generation.
· Continue research to improve and enhance the nation’s transmission and generation infrastructure as well as the deployment of technologies such as smart grid, real-time forecasting for transmission capacity, and sustainable energy generation which provide a reasonable return on investment.
The ASCE, founded in 1852, is the country's oldest national civil engineering organization. It represents more than 140,000 civil engineers in private practice, government, industry, and academia who are dedicated to advancing the science and profession of civil engineering.
Click to expand...

I asked if you would like to increase the technical nature of this debate.

You quoted links, and someone else's work.

It's clear your personal knowledge of the principles of the creation, storage and distribution of electricity are limited to a quick Google search. Reading or listening to the ignorant explain how great green or renewable energy is like getting a lesson in Mathematics from a Chimpanzee.

Honestly, your level of understanding is based on a political ideology, and that's the problem with "green energy", the ignorant are the one's who push for it's very inefficient and NOT so green development.

Here, this should be easy for you.

What's the sinusoidal characteristics of output of your typical VFD and how does it's manipulation contribute to motor efficiency ?

Another easy one, what's the the phase angle for a power factor of 1.0 and what influence does capacitance or inductance or both have on the power quality of a grid ? Explain in detail the effect of reactance on power generation, explain what is and the effect of non-linear loads and explain how to offset the effects of any of these if they are indeed detrimental to power quality. Explain the difference in linear and non-linear.

And do this with out consulting someone else's work.

Last one and it's pretty simple, if I wanted to build a multiplexing 8 bit shift register, which IC would I need, from what class of IC's would I select it from and what is the frequency of the clock chip would I need ?

Rabid Alpaca is also very knowledgeable so he can't answer.
 
Last edited:
cannuck said:
Here is my favourite front runner for diesel (although this IS a diesel hybrid) commuter. Note: it will be produced this year, but I can guarantee you it will never be sold in North America. Volkswagen 1-litre car - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...

Cool. Yeah, the US has this thing about diesel passenger vehicles. The older models a few decades ago were pretty stinky (everyone hated being behind them). That rep has held.
 
clownboy said:
Cool. Yeah, the US has this thing about diesel passenger vehicles. The older models a few decades ago were pretty stinky (everyone hated being behind them). That rep has held.
Click to expand...
Sadly I have to say that one of the biggest mistakes was not putting diesel under the EPA gun to control emissions far sooner. As a result, the technology lagged far behind the gassers for too long. But, they are doing a hell of a job playing catch-up today (and surpassing in many areas). What John Q. does not appreciate is that unlike SI (spark ignition = gassers for the non-automotive types) CI engines using the diesel cycle are truly multi-fuel engines, and unlike very limited tech (such as electric) can accommodate all kinds of alternatives without the need to invest trillions of dollars we don't have in new infrastructure. The waste veg oil cars are a perfect example.
 
Fenton said:
I asked if you would like to increase the technical nature of this debate.

You quoted links, and someone else's work.

It's clear your personal knowledge of the principles of the creation, storage and distribution of electricity are limited to a quick Google search. Reading or listening to the ignorant explain how great green or renewable energy is like getting a lesson in Mathematics from a Chimpanzee.

Honestly, your level of understanding is based on a political ideology, and that's the problem with "green energy", the ignorant are the one's who push for it's very inefficient and NOT so green development.

Here, this should be easy for you.

What's the sinusoidal characteristics of output of your typical VFD and how does it's manipulation contribute to motor efficiency ?

Another easy one, what's the the phase angle for a power factor of 1.0 and what influence does capacitance or inductance or both have on the power quality of a grid ? Explain in detail the effect of reactance on power generation, explain what is and the effect of non-linear loads and explain how to offset the effects of any of these if they are indeed detrimental to power quality. Explain the difference in linear and non-linear.

And do this with out consulting someone else's work.

Last one and it's pretty simple, if I wanted to build a multiplexing 8 bit shift register, which IC would I need, from what class of IC's would I select it from and what is the frequency of the clock chip would I need ?

Rabid Alpaca is also very knowledgeable so he can't answer.
Click to expand...

Bwhahahahahaaa ****in A dude I am not one of those so called "green power" people. Despite what you think just because I disagree with something you say does not make me a Al Gore bitch. You obviously have a lot to learn about communicating with people. For one you cannot assume by the little that we have exchanged exactly what position that I have on this matter, mostly because I havenet gave one Sherlock. You should think before just spouting off canned arguments aimed at your normal sparring partners. I am not them so dont bother me again until you can take your head out of your ass.

Im not so insecure that I need to prove my knowledge of power transmission to you, plus what exact purpose would it make now? Take your pissing contest to the play ground where it belongs. I already established that high power transmission results in losing some inefficiency. I also established through that googled link that gave data from The American Society of Civil Engineers that proved you wrong. You have heard of them before havent you? Are you asserting that you some poster on the internet is right and they are wrong? As dfar as I know those irrelevant questions to this debate were copied and pasted from some site. All I know is that we were talking about power loss over long distances and you failed to mention the basic concept of resistance. That was your mistake not mine. I guess that you cant accept mistakes and must save face now so you go into irrelevant BS to prove yourself. Hey if you really know your stuff you could prove it in the debate.

But then you are not debating from what I have read so far from you. Instead you are just demanding that everyone conform to your assertions.

Have a good day I know that I am after all its windy outside which means free electricity to power my grow lights and the lights in my house. :) I love spring winds.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Have a good day I know that I am after all its windy outside which means free electricity to power my grow lights and the lights in my house. :) I love spring winds.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. An ecologically friendly grow op?
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Bwhahahahahaaa ****in A dude I am not one of those so called "green power" people. Despite what you think just because I disagree with something you say does not make me a Al Gore bitch. You obviously have a lot to learn about communicating with people. For one you cannot assume by the little that we have exchanged exactly what position that I have on this matter, mostly because I havenet gave one Sherlock. You should think before just spouting off canned arguments aimed at your normal sparring partners. I am not them so dont bother me again until you can take your head out of your ass.

Im not so insecure that I need to prove my knowledge of power transmission to you, plus what exact purpose would it make now? Take your pissing contest to the play ground where it belongs. I already established that high power transmission results in losing some inefficiency. I also established through that googled link that gave data from The American Society of Civil Engineers that proved you wrong. You have heard of them before havent you? Are you asserting that you some poster on the internet is right and they are wrong? As dfar as I know those irrelevant questions to this debate were copied and pasted from some site. All I know is that we were talking about power loss over long distances and you failed to mention the basic concept of resistance. That was your mistake not mine. I guess that you cant accept mistakes and must save face now so you go into irrelevant BS to prove yourself. Hey if you really know your stuff you could prove it in the debate.

But then you are not debating from what I have read so far from you. Instead you are just demanding that everyone conform to your assertions.

Have a good day I know that I am after all its windy outside which means free electricity to power my grow lights and the lights in my house. :) I love spring winds.
Click to expand...


You can't answer even the most basic and fundamental questions on power quality and transmission ? It's not a pissing contest, it's just proof that your speaking out of your ass. Commenting on topics you know nothing about.


But you grew up next to a hydro-electrical dam and everything.
 
Fenton said:
You can't answer even the most basic and fundamental questions on power quality and transmission ? It's not a pissing contest, it's just proof that your speaking out of your ass. Commenting on topics you know nothing about.


But you grew up next to a hydro-electrical dam and everything.
Click to expand...

Lol if you say so.

So why dont you enlighten us with your vast knowledge of these things and tell us what your big plan is?
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Lol if you say so.

So why dont you enlighten us with your vast knowledge of these things and tell us what your big plan is?
Click to expand...

Capitalize on existing technology, quit wasting money on nonsense like wind energy and photovoltaic.

Tell politicians to shove their carbon credits up their ass.

Quit buying into the bull sh** AGW narrative.

Trust me, we're no where near a break through on batteries, cold fusion, super-conductivity, piezeo-electric, or any other new technology that could remotely be comparable to our current standards.

Nuclear is a great alternative to massive solar plants. Just don't build on a coast thats suceptable to tidal waves.

As it turns out, the advent of higher effeciency appliances and central air units and LED Lighting is the most practical way to conserve energy and save money.

Advances in Fracking has allowed access to oil that was previously unreachable.

In short quit buying into the BS.
 
clownboy said:
We've already done the research and paid for it many times over. The alternatives have been available for decades. My uncles have been running their vehicles on clean, cheap, available propane since the 60s. When I first moved to Oregon after the service they had cool little all-electric cars on sale at the battery Exchange for 2K. And damn but one of my favorite cars was a Honda 600 - 50 mpg.
Click to expand...

We want cars that won't explode.
 
Fenton said:
Capitalize on existing technology, quit wasting money on nonsense like wind energy and photovoltaic.

Tell politicians to shove their carbon credits up their ass.

Quit buying into the bull sh** AGW narrative.

Trust me, we're no where near a break through on batteries, cold fusion, super-conductivity, piezeo-electric, or any other new technology that could remotely be comparable to our current standards.

Nuclear is a great alternative to massive solar plants. Just don't build on a coast thats suceptable to tidal waves.

As it turns out, the advent of higher effeciency appliances and central air units and LED Lighting is the most practical way to conserve energy and save money.

Advances in Fracking has allowed access to oil that was previously unreachable.

In short quit buying into the BS.
Click to expand...

That sounds more like a political platform than a plan.

The problem with your plan though is the unpredictability of technological research. Of course planning right now we can count on what may never come s we must do the best with what we have. Regardless of how you feel about research it will continue on despite whether you think its a good idea or not. The reason that it will is for several reasons. One of the reasons is because people can make money off of new technology. The other is that some people just like to think.

Nuclear isnt a great anything really. I really dont buy into the BS about nuclear power being the big solution. One thing though that nuclear power does is make this country very vulnerable to attacks. You can build far from Tsunami's but its much harder to build them out of reach of missiles. Just one nuclear power plant could make a vast region of the country a wasteland. Its like we built our own Trojan horses.


ANd I agree that LED's and Energy Star appliances do a lot to save energy waste.


Fracking and oil armageddon dont interest me at all so Ill leave that to you.

And while I am not big into the man made climate change fight between literally everyone, I do recognize the fact that pollution is best avoided. History has shown that pollution is bad. You dont even need to worry about all that talk about man made global warming and all that. I mean you have to admit that pollution must not be all that good for our planet? But even then if you ignore all of that its still a good idea not to pollute things unnecessarily. I always clean after myself so should industry its not a lot to ask really it should be part of their business plan. It is part of my business plan to be sure. The property that I own is only so big I need every bit of it wouldnt want to ruin a portion of it.

But I definitely agree that carbon credits is one of the most corrupted ideas that I have heard. Its just like the copper mine that I live nearby, they pay fines sometimes rather than doing it the clean way because its cheaper to pay the fines.
 
clownboy said:
We've already done the research and paid for it many times over. The alternatives have been available for decades. My uncles have been running their vehicles on clean, cheap, available propane since the 60s. When I first moved to Oregon after the service they had cool little all-electric cars on sale at the battery Exchange for 2K. And damn but one of my favorite cars was a Honda 600 - 50 mpg.
Click to expand...

I have a 63 Ford Falcon with a 144cu straight 6, I get 35 mpg with the original engine and it needs rebuilt. The technology exists for high mpg vehicles its just that the buying public wants to be able to go fast. Though I suspect that is changing. I was going to remove that 144 to put in a bigger engine but since fuel prices dont seem to be going down I think Ill stick with it and just rebuild the engine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom