go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
0
go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
This is great and all but OIL companies and car companies are the ones who are preventing new technologies from being made. They will not allow for a new alternative energy source unless they have a part of it. They are not going to give up their millions and millions of dollars regardless if their product is contributing and a main contributing source to the problem at hand.
Everything in this world revolves around $$$. If something challenges that then a company/organization will spend more money to discredit the findings even if hte findings have merit and truth.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
This is great and all but OIL companies and car companies are the ones who are preventing new technologies from being made. They will not allow for a new alternative energy source unless they have a part of it. They are not going to give up their millions and millions of dollars regardless if their product is contributing and a main contributing source to the problem at hand.
Everything in this world revolves around $$$. If something challenges that then a company/organization will spend more money to discredit the findings even if hte findings have merit and truth.
go buy a hand cranked manual generator so that you dont have to use the energy coming into your house, you know the kind they make by emitting greenhouse gases.
solar and wind are not viable until a super battery is created. end of story. if you are worried about gaseous emissions then we use nuclear, but that has toxic solid waste that you have to do something with also. pretty much the only kind of energy that doest produce is hydroelectricity but that is only available in certain parts of the country (where there is a big water resevoir/damn/waterfall.)
what is your option. just crying about global warming (assuming its man made) does nothing to solve the problem.
i'm out to class
0
go buy a hand cranked manual generator so that you dont have to use the energy coming into your house, you know the kind they make by emitting greenhouse gases.
solar and wind are not viable until a super battery is created. end of story. if you are worried about gaseous emissions then we use nuclear, but that has toxic solid waste that you have to do something with also. pretty much the only kind of energy that doest produce is hydroelectricity but that is only available in certain parts of the country (where there is a big water resevoir/damn/waterfall.)
what is your option. just crying about global warming (assuming its man made) does nothing to solve the problem.
go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
ON a clear day like today, i can look to the west and see TMI, look to the east and see Limerick, and drive a couple miles south and can see Peachbottom. It's kinda weird that this is supposedly one of the most fertile plots of land in the world, and we are triangulated by three big ass nuclear power plants. dead in the middle of it all is a large tribe of peoples living and thriving in 21st century America using 19th century way of life. oh well, what can i do, worry about the nuclear power plants? i grew up watching the Simpsons, i'm sure that they are well kept after. i mean, the regulatory bodies that comission their safety only have to grant them a license of operation once every 20 years
I can't say reading that China is ramping up nuclear power plant production makes me feel all that good inside though
China
is preparing to build three times as many nuclear power plants in the
coming decade as the rest of the world combined, a breakneck pace with
the potential to help slow global warming.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
go create a super-battery so we can use solar power. until you or someone else does this, we are working with the best option we have. unless you want to go live next to a nuclear power plant. i think nuclear is the best way to go as far as energy but i wouldn't want to live next to one of those or store waste in my state (see what utah did) either. so either we cut energy demands to an astronomical amount (good bye to the way you live) or we live with a little greenhouse gas and some bizarre weather.
its a personal choice. there is no right answer. (at least imo)
ON a clear day like today, i can look to the west and see TMI, look to the east and see Limerick, and drive a couple miles south and can see Peachbottom. It's kinda weird that this is supposedly one of the most fertile plots of land in the world, and we are triangulated by three big ass nuclear power plants. dead in the middle of it all is a large tribe of peoples living and thriving in 21st century America using 19th century way of life. oh well, what can i do, worry about the nuclear power plants? i grew up watching the Simpsons, i'm sure that they are well kept after. i mean, the regulatory bodies that comission their safety only have to grant them a license of operation once every 20 years
I can't say reading that China is ramping up nuclear power plant production makes me feel all that good inside though
China
is preparing to build three times as many nuclear power plants in the
coming decade as the rest of the world combined, a breakneck pace with
the potential to help slow global warming.
this has nothing to do with democrats or republicans D, this is about proper science and what we are doing with our earth.
How many "record breaking" weather related events have there been this year now?
like i said, if you think this is such A BIG DEAL, then get rid of your refrigerator, and your car, and start living like the native Americans. i am personally not ready to make such a sacrifice until i see better evidence of detrimental effects towards me. you can call me an idiot or whatever but even if it were proven i would bet the majority of americans wouldnt want to give up those things either.
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
this has nothing to do with democrats or republicans D, this is about proper science and what we are doing with our earth.
How many "record breaking" weather related events have there been this year now?
like i said, if you think this is such A BIG DEAL, then get rid of your refrigerator, and your car, and start living like the native Americans. i am personally not ready to make such a sacrifice until i see better evidence of detrimental effects towards me. you can call me an idiot or whatever but even if it were proven i would bet the majority of americans wouldnt want to give up those things either.
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
I wish you were the president of the United States, you have the answers for everything
0
Quote Originally Posted by DiscoD69:
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
I wish you were the president of the United States, you have the answers for everything
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
you clearly have no idea how the energy system works. just because you say we should do these thing doesnt make them feasible or even possible, let alone efficient.
if we could create enough energy with wind and solar then we would have done so by now buddy. you think its possible but that nobody wants to do it? all the energy we use, that is, all the energy on the power grid is being made at the same time it is being used. you cannot pause the energy creation or all of your things will stop working. so at night (or when its cloudy) and the sun isn't shining you can't get any energy. when the wind isnt blowing, you cant get any energy. that is why we only use such things as a supplement to our energy supply.
again, you would need super-batteries, which we CANNOT make yet, to store the power of the sun and the wind so that it can be used when it is not shining or blowing respectively. WE DONT HAVE THIS TECHNOLOGY YET. if we did we would use it.
as for hydro, that can only happen when water naturally falls from a cliff or something similar. we can also build dams if the conditions are proper. you need a TON of water to drop down a cliff to harness the potential energy of the gravity. this is only possible in certain areas of the country. try using hydro power to sustain the whole state in kansas or something, just not going to happen.
emissions are a product of harnessing the energy we use everyday. it really is the best way we have right now. and what do you mean by leak toxins? do you mean leak toxins, like your oil leaking out of your car or do you mean emitting toxins as in the gas from your car.
there's a huge difference between toxic gas that is created through various industrial processes and greenhouse gases which are created in numerous ways.
0
Quote Originally Posted by DiscoD69:
No. Make appliances that don't leak toxins. Switch our electricity grid and supply to ZERO (to very low) emmisions from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, and even hydro etc.
Your judgement is clouded big time. I know you've been told that the only alternative to the status quo is an apocolyptic socialist nightmare, but just like almost everything else, you've been lied to.
you clearly have no idea how the energy system works. just because you say we should do these thing doesnt make them feasible or even possible, let alone efficient.
if we could create enough energy with wind and solar then we would have done so by now buddy. you think its possible but that nobody wants to do it? all the energy we use, that is, all the energy on the power grid is being made at the same time it is being used. you cannot pause the energy creation or all of your things will stop working. so at night (or when its cloudy) and the sun isn't shining you can't get any energy. when the wind isnt blowing, you cant get any energy. that is why we only use such things as a supplement to our energy supply.
again, you would need super-batteries, which we CANNOT make yet, to store the power of the sun and the wind so that it can be used when it is not shining or blowing respectively. WE DONT HAVE THIS TECHNOLOGY YET. if we did we would use it.
as for hydro, that can only happen when water naturally falls from a cliff or something similar. we can also build dams if the conditions are proper. you need a TON of water to drop down a cliff to harness the potential energy of the gravity. this is only possible in certain areas of the country. try using hydro power to sustain the whole state in kansas or something, just not going to happen.
emissions are a product of harnessing the energy we use everyday. it really is the best way we have right now. and what do you mean by leak toxins? do you mean leak toxins, like your oil leaking out of your car or do you mean emitting toxins as in the gas from your car.
there's a huge difference between toxic gas that is created through various industrial processes and greenhouse gases which are created in numerous ways.
ON a clear day like today, i can look to the west and see TMI, look to the east and see Limerick, and drive a couple miles south and can see Peachbottom. It's kinda weird that this is supposedly one of the most fertile plots of land in the world, and we are triangulated by three big ass nuclear power plants. dead in the middle of it all is a large tribe of peoples living and thriving in 21st century America using 19th century way of life. oh well, what can i do, worry about the nuclear power plants? i grew up watching the Simpsons, i'm sure that they are well kept after. i mean, the regulatory bodies that comission their safety only have to grant them a license of operation once every 20 years
I can't say reading that China is ramping up nuclear power plant production makes me feel all that good inside though
China
is preparing to build three times as many nuclear power plants in the
coming decade as the rest of the world combined, a breakneck pace with
the potential to help slow global warming.
i know what you are saying. i personally don't think nuclear power plants are that dangerous to the surrounding people unless there is a meltdown or something else out of the ordinary happening. they are actually pretty safe despite what you see on the simpsons.
nuclear really is the only answer we have to the problem from what we have in development right now. it is a trade off between what type of pollution you want. emissions from gasoline and coal and such, or nuclear waste.
china is building that many nuclear power plants because they know the technology is relatively safe (they can probably fix that with their attentions to detail). the american people are scared shitless of nuclear power plants for little to no reason except they are called nuclear and all everybody thinks of is nuclear bombs. china doesnt have to worry about what the people think (whether theyre right or wrong, this time the people are wrong) so they are building what is really going to be best for their country in the upcoming years. you wanna talk about losing dependence on foreign oil, nuclear is your only option.
0
Quote Originally Posted by be easy:
ON a clear day like today, i can look to the west and see TMI, look to the east and see Limerick, and drive a couple miles south and can see Peachbottom. It's kinda weird that this is supposedly one of the most fertile plots of land in the world, and we are triangulated by three big ass nuclear power plants. dead in the middle of it all is a large tribe of peoples living and thriving in 21st century America using 19th century way of life. oh well, what can i do, worry about the nuclear power plants? i grew up watching the Simpsons, i'm sure that they are well kept after. i mean, the regulatory bodies that comission their safety only have to grant them a license of operation once every 20 years
I can't say reading that China is ramping up nuclear power plant production makes me feel all that good inside though
China
is preparing to build three times as many nuclear power plants in the
coming decade as the rest of the world combined, a breakneck pace with
the potential to help slow global warming.
i know what you are saying. i personally don't think nuclear power plants are that dangerous to the surrounding people unless there is a meltdown or something else out of the ordinary happening. they are actually pretty safe despite what you see on the simpsons.
nuclear really is the only answer we have to the problem from what we have in development right now. it is a trade off between what type of pollution you want. emissions from gasoline and coal and such, or nuclear waste.
china is building that many nuclear power plants because they know the technology is relatively safe (they can probably fix that with their attentions to detail). the american people are scared shitless of nuclear power plants for little to no reason except they are called nuclear and all everybody thinks of is nuclear bombs. china doesnt have to worry about what the people think (whether theyre right or wrong, this time the people are wrong) so they are building what is really going to be best for their country in the upcoming years. you wanna talk about losing dependence on foreign oil, nuclear is your only option.
Issued by The National Weather Service New York City, NY
4:34 pm EST, Fri., Dec. 18, 2009
... WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM NOON SATURDAY TO 11 AM EST SUNDAY...
A WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM NOON SATURDAY TO 11 AM EST SUNDAY.
DEEPENING LOW PRESSURE OVER THE ATLANTIC SATURDAY AND SATURDAY NIGHT
WILL RESULT IN THE A PERIOD OF MODERATE TO HEAVY SNOW AND GUSTY WINDS.
SNOWFALL ACCUMULATIONS OF 8 TO 6 INCHES ARE POSSIBLE BEFORE THE SNOW
ENDS SUNDAY MORNING.
ANY MINOR DEVIATION
IN THE TRACK OF THIS STORM SYSTEM WILL HAVE A LARGE IMPACT ON SNOW
AMOUNTS AND WIND STRENGTH. AT THIS TIME... THE BEST ESTIMATION IS FOR
THE STORM TO TAKE A FAVORABLE TRACK TO PRODUCE THIS MODERATE TO HEAVY
SNOW AND STRONG GUSTY WINDS. STAY TUNED.
0
Issued by The National Weather Service New York City, NY
4:34 pm EST, Fri., Dec. 18, 2009
... WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM NOON SATURDAY TO 11 AM EST SUNDAY...
A WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT FROM NOON SATURDAY TO 11 AM EST SUNDAY.
DEEPENING LOW PRESSURE OVER THE ATLANTIC SATURDAY AND SATURDAY NIGHT
WILL RESULT IN THE A PERIOD OF MODERATE TO HEAVY SNOW AND GUSTY WINDS.
SNOWFALL ACCUMULATIONS OF 8 TO 6 INCHES ARE POSSIBLE BEFORE THE SNOW
ENDS SUNDAY MORNING.
ANY MINOR DEVIATION
IN THE TRACK OF THIS STORM SYSTEM WILL HAVE A LARGE IMPACT ON SNOW
AMOUNTS AND WIND STRENGTH. AT THIS TIME... THE BEST ESTIMATION IS FOR
THE STORM TO TAKE A FAVORABLE TRACK TO PRODUCE THIS MODERATE TO HEAVY
SNOW AND STRONG GUSTY WINDS. STAY TUNED.
This is great and all but OIL companies and car companies are the ones who are preventing new technologies from being made. They will not allow for a new alternative energy source unless they have a part of it. They are not going to give up their millions and millions of dollars regardless if their product is contributing and a main contributing source to the problem at hand.
Everything in this world revolves around $$$. If something challenges that then a company/organization will spend more money to discredit the findings even if hte findings have merit and truth.
nobody is discrediting any findings with oil money. the fact is that electric cars SUCK ASS. do you want one. you've seen those zipcars? you want one of those? you can only drive about 100 miles at a time and then you have to charge it for like 8 hours. try driving from philly to boston like that. people dont want them. they are trying to have battery stations on the highways so that you can switch them in and out but that required an entire infrastructure overhaul, and the demand isnt quite there yet. people are trying to get it to work though. and you can't carry any load with it, let alone hitch something to the back of it. they are fancy go carts.
you're entire preventing things from being made and oil companies suppressing revolutionary technology is so bogus its not even funny. you think somebody is going to come out with an electric car that is better than the combustion engine and then be bought off. HA. Whoever creates a new electric engine that can compete with a combustion engine will be richer than the oil companies immediately.
its a bogus conspiracy theory at best.
and this brings me to another point which i am not really sure about actually. the govt gives money for people to research alternative fuels just as it does for cancer research etc. one of the problems with the fuel research is the same as cancer. you put so much money into it year after year and you never see any return on your investment. also people don't relate to alternative energy like they do cancer (nobodies mother has died from a lack of alternative energy) and thus there is no public donations to try and develop new energies. politicians will scrap the projects because there is no return and especially now because there is no money. its a tough call on whether the research for alternative fuels should rest in the hands of the public, who wont realize we need it until its to late, and the government, who really shouldnt be funding any of that shit to begin with.
but oil companies arent suppressing technologies, the technologies just arent there. and the ones that arent really just dont compete. americans as a whole are not willing to sacrifice. its part of what makes us great but it might also be our fatal flaw.
0
Quote Originally Posted by jpero:
This is great and all but OIL companies and car companies are the ones who are preventing new technologies from being made. They will not allow for a new alternative energy source unless they have a part of it. They are not going to give up their millions and millions of dollars regardless if their product is contributing and a main contributing source to the problem at hand.
Everything in this world revolves around $$$. If something challenges that then a company/organization will spend more money to discredit the findings even if hte findings have merit and truth.
nobody is discrediting any findings with oil money. the fact is that electric cars SUCK ASS. do you want one. you've seen those zipcars? you want one of those? you can only drive about 100 miles at a time and then you have to charge it for like 8 hours. try driving from philly to boston like that. people dont want them. they are trying to have battery stations on the highways so that you can switch them in and out but that required an entire infrastructure overhaul, and the demand isnt quite there yet. people are trying to get it to work though. and you can't carry any load with it, let alone hitch something to the back of it. they are fancy go carts.
you're entire preventing things from being made and oil companies suppressing revolutionary technology is so bogus its not even funny. you think somebody is going to come out with an electric car that is better than the combustion engine and then be bought off. HA. Whoever creates a new electric engine that can compete with a combustion engine will be richer than the oil companies immediately.
its a bogus conspiracy theory at best.
and this brings me to another point which i am not really sure about actually. the govt gives money for people to research alternative fuels just as it does for cancer research etc. one of the problems with the fuel research is the same as cancer. you put so much money into it year after year and you never see any return on your investment. also people don't relate to alternative energy like they do cancer (nobodies mother has died from a lack of alternative energy) and thus there is no public donations to try and develop new energies. politicians will scrap the projects because there is no return and especially now because there is no money. its a tough call on whether the research for alternative fuels should rest in the hands of the public, who wont realize we need it until its to late, and the government, who really shouldnt be funding any of that shit to begin with.
but oil companies arent suppressing technologies, the technologies just arent there. and the ones that arent really just dont compete. americans as a whole are not willing to sacrifice. its part of what makes us great but it might also be our fatal flaw.
talked to an environmental engineer tonight. seems to think that electric cars will be the standard within 50 years. he thinks they will have those battery replacement centers that are similar to gas stations.
he also told me about a different kind of solar. its called solar thermal and basically what they do is take a whole bunch of sunlight, and then reposition it with mirrors. so basically they have a thousand mirrors all pointing sunlight onto a giant pile of salt. this salt then gets hot enough and turns into molten salt. this molten salt will stay hot even after the sun has set and continue to create steam from its heat even after the sun is down. pretty cool stuff if you ask me. he also said that if you create you electricity with coal and then use that energy to power electric cars that you would still be using less energy than using just gasoline. he believes that there will be battery stations just like there is gas stations within 50 years...more specifically within our lifetime. verry verry interesting.....
0
talked to an environmental engineer tonight. seems to think that electric cars will be the standard within 50 years. he thinks they will have those battery replacement centers that are similar to gas stations.
he also told me about a different kind of solar. its called solar thermal and basically what they do is take a whole bunch of sunlight, and then reposition it with mirrors. so basically they have a thousand mirrors all pointing sunlight onto a giant pile of salt. this salt then gets hot enough and turns into molten salt. this molten salt will stay hot even after the sun has set and continue to create steam from its heat even after the sun is down. pretty cool stuff if you ask me. he also said that if you create you electricity with coal and then use that energy to power electric cars that you would still be using less energy than using just gasoline. he believes that there will be battery stations just like there is gas stations within 50 years...more specifically within our lifetime. verry verry interesting.....
he also said that if you create you electricity with coal and then use
that energy to power electric cars that you would still be using less
energy than using just gasoline.
should say
if you create your electricity with coal and then use
that energy to power electric cars that you would still be emitting less greenhouse gases than using just gasoline.
0
he also said that if you create you electricity with coal and then use
that energy to power electric cars that you would still be using less
energy than using just gasoline.
should say
if you create your electricity with coal and then use
that energy to power electric cars that you would still be emitting less greenhouse gases than using just gasoline.
he is also gung ho on man made climate change. he doesnt have a doubt in his mind. he also doesnt have a doubt in his mind that it can be fixed. he is a very smart person and i wish i agreed with him because i would never want to argue against him, but that is how my logic works....what i believe is what i believe....
0
he is also gung ho on man made climate change. he doesnt have a doubt in his mind. he also doesnt have a doubt in his mind that it can be fixed. he is a very smart person and i wish i agreed with him because i would never want to argue against him, but that is how my logic works....what i believe is what i believe....
nobody is discrediting any findings with oil money. the fact is that electric cars SUCK ASS. do you want one. you've seen those zipcars? you want one of those? you can only drive about 100 miles at a time and then you have to charge it for like 8 hours. try driving from philly to boston like that. people dont want them. they are trying to have battery stations on the highways so that you can switch them in and out but that required an entire infrastructure overhaul, and the demand isnt quite there yet. people are trying to get it to work though. and you can't carry any load with it, let alone hitch something to the back of it. they are fancy go carts.
you're entire preventing things from being made and oil companies suppressing revolutionary technology is so bogus its not even funny. you think somebody is going to come out with an electric car that is better than the combustion engine and then be bought off. HA. Whoever creates a new electric engine that can compete with a combustion engine will be richer than the oil companies immediately.
its a bogus conspiracy theory at best.
and this brings me to another point which i am not really sure about actually. the govt gives money for people to research alternative fuels just as it does for cancer research etc. one of the problems with the fuel research is the same as cancer. you put so much money into it year after year and you never see any return on your investment. also people don't relate to alternative energy like they do cancer (nobodies mother has died from a lack of alternative energy) and thus there is no public donations to try and develop new energies. politicians will scrap the projects because there is no return and especially now because there is no money. its a tough call on whether the research for alternative fuels should rest in the hands of the public, who wont realize we need it until its to late, and the government, who really shouldnt be funding any of that shit to begin with.
but oil companies arent suppressing technologies, the technologies just arent there. and the ones that arent really just dont compete. americans as a whole are not willing to sacrifice. its part of what makes us great but it might also be our fatal flaw.
110% wrong.
Exxon mobile and other oil companies buy up the rights to new technologies that challenge their business. They then put these innovations on the back burner and never release them
Exxon for instance has owned and known about geothermal energy for the past 30 years. It is not until the past few years that people have started hearing about geothermal technology. The same type of things happen with other technologies.
It is bogus you would think Oil companies would be willing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars because of a new energy source and not have a hand in being a part of the new technology.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
nobody is discrediting any findings with oil money. the fact is that electric cars SUCK ASS. do you want one. you've seen those zipcars? you want one of those? you can only drive about 100 miles at a time and then you have to charge it for like 8 hours. try driving from philly to boston like that. people dont want them. they are trying to have battery stations on the highways so that you can switch them in and out but that required an entire infrastructure overhaul, and the demand isnt quite there yet. people are trying to get it to work though. and you can't carry any load with it, let alone hitch something to the back of it. they are fancy go carts.
you're entire preventing things from being made and oil companies suppressing revolutionary technology is so bogus its not even funny. you think somebody is going to come out with an electric car that is better than the combustion engine and then be bought off. HA. Whoever creates a new electric engine that can compete with a combustion engine will be richer than the oil companies immediately.
its a bogus conspiracy theory at best.
and this brings me to another point which i am not really sure about actually. the govt gives money for people to research alternative fuels just as it does for cancer research etc. one of the problems with the fuel research is the same as cancer. you put so much money into it year after year and you never see any return on your investment. also people don't relate to alternative energy like they do cancer (nobodies mother has died from a lack of alternative energy) and thus there is no public donations to try and develop new energies. politicians will scrap the projects because there is no return and especially now because there is no money. its a tough call on whether the research for alternative fuels should rest in the hands of the public, who wont realize we need it until its to late, and the government, who really shouldnt be funding any of that shit to begin with.
but oil companies arent suppressing technologies, the technologies just arent there. and the ones that arent really just dont compete. americans as a whole are not willing to sacrifice. its part of what makes us great but it might also be our fatal flaw.
110% wrong.
Exxon mobile and other oil companies buy up the rights to new technologies that challenge their business. They then put these innovations on the back burner and never release them
Exxon for instance has owned and known about geothermal energy for the past 30 years. It is not until the past few years that people have started hearing about geothermal technology. The same type of things happen with other technologies.
It is bogus you would think Oil companies would be willing to lose hundreds of millions of dollars because of a new energy source and not have a hand in being a part of the new technology.
listen buddy, as long as geothermal energy has been in existence, anybody who has wanted to know about it has the ability to know about it. these technologies arent created in somebodies backyard, they are created at universities and other scientific institutions. people publish papers showing their results and anybody who wants to can go take a look and if they want to, also apply the technology to a business plan. i am not an expert in energy or geothermal energy. if you are saying exxon has a patent on geothermal energy and nobody else is allowed to produce it, then i am laughing. geothermal is just not that great of a technology to begin with or else people would be using it. you cannot create enough power with it to power a state or a country.
jpero, i have read what you have read before, i just dont happen to believe it because i know a thing or two about energy creation. everybody else in this thread clearly does not.
exxon has owned and known about geothermal for 30 years....
just a quick wiki search tells me that
Geothermal power is power extracted from heat stored in the earth. This geothermal energy originates from the original formation of the planet, from radioactive decay of minerals, and from solar energy absorbed at the surface.
It has been used for bathing since Paleolithic times and for space heating since ancient Roman times, but is now better known for generating electricity
The Earth's geothermal resources are theoretically more than adequate
to supply humanity's energy needs, but only a very small fraction of it
may be profitably exploited. Drilling and exploration for deep
resources costs tens of millions of dollars, and success is not
guaranteed.
maybe this has something to with the lack of geothermal energy. it is not exxon blocking the use of the technology.
Forecasts for the future penetration of geothermal power depend on
assumptions about technology growth, the price of energy, subsidies,
and interest rates.
pretty big assumptions huh?
i am not anti-alternative energy. in fact i think it is the single most important thing facing our generation. but if these things were feasible other people would have exploited them to make a profit. big oil isnt the only greedy bastards in this world. trust me pal, if we could make it happen, we would.
0
listen buddy, as long as geothermal energy has been in existence, anybody who has wanted to know about it has the ability to know about it. these technologies arent created in somebodies backyard, they are created at universities and other scientific institutions. people publish papers showing their results and anybody who wants to can go take a look and if they want to, also apply the technology to a business plan. i am not an expert in energy or geothermal energy. if you are saying exxon has a patent on geothermal energy and nobody else is allowed to produce it, then i am laughing. geothermal is just not that great of a technology to begin with or else people would be using it. you cannot create enough power with it to power a state or a country.
jpero, i have read what you have read before, i just dont happen to believe it because i know a thing or two about energy creation. everybody else in this thread clearly does not.
exxon has owned and known about geothermal for 30 years....
just a quick wiki search tells me that
Geothermal power is power extracted from heat stored in the earth. This geothermal energy originates from the original formation of the planet, from radioactive decay of minerals, and from solar energy absorbed at the surface.
It has been used for bathing since Paleolithic times and for space heating since ancient Roman times, but is now better known for generating electricity
The Earth's geothermal resources are theoretically more than adequate
to supply humanity's energy needs, but only a very small fraction of it
may be profitably exploited. Drilling and exploration for deep
resources costs tens of millions of dollars, and success is not
guaranteed.
maybe this has something to with the lack of geothermal energy. it is not exxon blocking the use of the technology.
Forecasts for the future penetration of geothermal power depend on
assumptions about technology growth, the price of energy, subsidies,
and interest rates.
pretty big assumptions huh?
i am not anti-alternative energy. in fact i think it is the single most important thing facing our generation. but if these things were feasible other people would have exploited them to make a profit. big oil isnt the only greedy bastards in this world. trust me pal, if we could make it happen, we would.
Probably not..and to think that big oil isnt concerned with alt energy is being very naive.
I would rather scrap healthcare and put some heavy muscle behind alt energy in creative ways..not to line the pockets of Boone Pickens or give his company a ton of dough/breaks rather fund small interests to develop the technology to bust open the bottleneck and bring costs dramatically down.
Also funding purchase of specific residential and commercial use of solar and wind that meets targeted guidelines..so certain output/efficiencies and a time frame in which the products have to be used..so over a 5-10 year period they have to perform or the tax break is rescinded.
0
Are we investing enough to accelerate technology?
Probably not..and to think that big oil isnt concerned with alt energy is being very naive.
I would rather scrap healthcare and put some heavy muscle behind alt energy in creative ways..not to line the pockets of Boone Pickens or give his company a ton of dough/breaks rather fund small interests to develop the technology to bust open the bottleneck and bring costs dramatically down.
Also funding purchase of specific residential and commercial use of solar and wind that meets targeted guidelines..so certain output/efficiencies and a time frame in which the products have to be used..so over a 5-10 year period they have to perform or the tax break is rescinded.
I have a friend in Vegas who is going to school at UNLV in their engineering department and their thesis for graduation is technology surrounding harnessing the sun to exponentially increase the efficiency of solar panels..
Basically they use a form of magnifying which can rotate and track the sun, then the magnifier hits the solar cells SPECIFICALLY in a very targeted fashion, and he was saying they can increase output exponentially..
Fund projects like that..I am rooting for the guy because he will be a millionaire if they produce this, and they will patent it and sell the technology/application. He mentioned that several large firms are going to come to their school presentation day and have already shown signs of interest.
0
Side note..
I have a friend in Vegas who is going to school at UNLV in their engineering department and their thesis for graduation is technology surrounding harnessing the sun to exponentially increase the efficiency of solar panels..
Basically they use a form of magnifying which can rotate and track the sun, then the magnifier hits the solar cells SPECIFICALLY in a very targeted fashion, and he was saying they can increase output exponentially..
Fund projects like that..I am rooting for the guy because he will be a millionaire if they produce this, and they will patent it and sell the technology/application. He mentioned that several large firms are going to come to their school presentation day and have already shown signs of interest.
Fund projects like that..I am rooting for the guy because he will be a
millionaire if they produce this, and they will patent it and sell the
technology/application. He mentioned that several large firms are going
to come to their school presentation day and have already shown signs
of interest.
better hope big oil doesnt buy his technology and 'sit on it' for 30 years...
0
Fund projects like that..I am rooting for the guy because he will be a
millionaire if they produce this, and they will patent it and sell the
technology/application. He mentioned that several large firms are going
to come to their school presentation day and have already shown signs
of interest.
better hope big oil doesnt buy his technology and 'sit on it' for 30 years...
well are we talking about global warming or toxic pollution. the theory is that greenhouse gas emissions are changing the weather. the theory has nothing to do with toxic gas. unless you think that CO2 levels are going to reach the point where every time we breath in we are being suffocated by CO2. that is absurb.
Let's say what you just said is correct. Perhaps it is only 5 years for
us. Maybe its 10 for our kids, then 20 for our grandkids. Therein lies
one of the arguments on global warming.
how exactly is global warming going to take years off of your life? from my understandings you just wont be able to live in new orleans and other topographical shifts or climate shifts but i fail to see how it will shave years off your life. unless you ARE talking about TOXIC pollution. but thats not what a greenhouse gas is.
0
Quote Originally Posted by williamwallace:
well are we talking about global warming or toxic pollution. the theory is that greenhouse gas emissions are changing the weather. the theory has nothing to do with toxic gas. unless you think that CO2 levels are going to reach the point where every time we breath in we are being suffocated by CO2. that is absurb.
Let's say what you just said is correct. Perhaps it is only 5 years for
us. Maybe its 10 for our kids, then 20 for our grandkids. Therein lies
one of the arguments on global warming.
how exactly is global warming going to take years off of your life? from my understandings you just wont be able to live in new orleans and other topographical shifts or climate shifts but i fail to see how it will shave years off your life. unless you ARE talking about TOXIC pollution. but thats not what a greenhouse gas is.
It takes seven trees to convert to oxygen the amount of CO2 the average person exhales in their life time (not inluding any activities, lifestyle etc. - just what you breathe)
So all you Global Warming doubters masking yourselves as still 'environmentally friendly' - how many trees have you planted to offset your footprint?
0
It takes seven trees to convert to oxygen the amount of CO2 the average person exhales in their life time (not inluding any activities, lifestyle etc. - just what you breathe)
So all you Global Warming doubters masking yourselves as still 'environmentally friendly' - how many trees have you planted to offset your footprint?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
.
). the american people are scared shitless of nuclear power plants for little to no reason except they are called nuclear and all everybody thinks of is nuclear bombs. china doesnt have to worry about what the people think (whether theyre right or wrong, this time the people are wrong) so they are building what is really going to be best for their country in the upcoming years. you wanna talk about losing dependence on foreign oil, nuclear is your only option.
Hot Forum Topics
