Author Topic: Gingrich says war on terror is phony... (Read 793 times)

crockett · « **Reply #15 on:** August 04, 2007, 09:50:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by USRanger
I just saw a commercial by BP 5 minutes ago saying they have invested 50 billion in researching alternative energy sources. Of course, the commercial doesn't say the length of time than money has been spent. Hell, they could be talking about the last 30 years, but they imply with the visual images that they are spending billions & billions of dollars on it RIGHT NOW.

BP along with many politicians are trying to push corn ethanol which is a bigger sham than oil is. Corn ethanol will get worst mileage than gas curentlly does and will cost close to the same amount as gas does now, if not more.

Reason the oil companies want to push corn ethanol, is because they can sell it at their current gas stations with little change. So they just exchange oil for corn and continue to rake in the big bucks.

The Politicians that are pushing it, are mainly from states that grow a lot of corn and bow down to the big farm lobbyist. In reality it will do little to weain us off oil because they can't grow enough to meet the needs of the entire US.

The end resualt, big biz makes more money and the typical end user gets bent over and screwed while he's thinking his govt really cares about the enviorment.

end of rant..

Maverick · « **Reply #16 on:** August 04, 2007, 09:52:15 PM »

Too much time and money is being spent on stop gap dead end things like ethanol instead of new ways to provide cheap fuel and or transportation solutions.

Until a means of producing electricity for vehicles is found that does not require the burning of hydrocarbons, electric vehicles won't be a feasible means of transportation or shipping goods. The same goes for passenger flight and cargo.

USRanger · « **Reply #17 on:** August 04, 2007, 10:03:51 PM »

Gentlemen. I think we are screwed.

Blooz · « **Reply #18 on:** August 04, 2007, 10:52:49 PM »

Necessity is the mother of invention.

You won't see anything until it's actually needed.

USRanger · « **Reply #19 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:11:21 AM »

...or too late.

Saxman · « **Reply #20 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:25:46 AM »

I said it in a project for a science class a couple years ago: Nuclear-powered automobiles.

Sixpence · « **Reply #21 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:40:29 AM »

I read an article recently that had the arab states saying they will cut production if the US turns to alternative fuels like biodiesel. **** them

I also read somewhere that they are getting close to nuetralizing radioctivity in the waste from nuclear plants.

**** them and their oil, the two faced, forked tongue scumbags

Saxman · « **Reply #22 on:** August 05, 2007, 12:52:04 AM »

I just want to be able to say I own an operate a "Nuclear Wessel" with a fake Russian accent.

USRanger · « **Reply #23 on:** August 05, 2007, 01:43:31 AM »

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #24 on:** August 05, 2007, 02:00:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RetroVirus
I think you missed me! The US consumes around 20m barrels of oil daily. If we would wean ourselves off 13m barrels worth of that (ethanol, nukes) the remaining 7m barrels from US production would still be in demand.

The President has initiated a new vision.

Quote

"I have a very deep belief in America's capabilities. Within the next 10 years, my program envisions: 200 major nuclear power plants; 250 major new coal mines; 150 major coal-fired power plants; 30 major new (oil) refineries; 20 major new synthetic fuel plants; the drilling of many thousands of new oil wells; the insulation of 18 million homes; and the manufacturing and the sale of millions of new automobiles, trucks and buses that use much less fuel. In another crisis -- the one in 1942 -- President Franklin D. Roosevelt said this country would build 60,000 military aircraft. By 1943, production in that program had reached 125,000 aircraft annually. They did it then. We can do it now."

Elfie · « **Reply #25 on:** August 05, 2007, 02:03:56 AM »

Remember that Turkey Blood to Oil plant in Missouri?

One of the reasons that isn't taking off as well as it was hoped is the turkey plant was paying $25 per ton to have their waste hauled away, now the *refinery* has to pay $35 a ton for the waste. Bad negotiations imo.

If companies weren't so greedy this thing might have taken off already. It would be the perfect renewable resource. Just from agricultural waste we could provide for all our energy needs.

I wonder what is going on with these folks, their site doesn't appear to have been updated in some time now. Also the page that talked about costs related to buying the waste has been removed. I hope this technology isn't dying out.

http://www.changingworldtech.com/index.asp

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #26 on:** August 05, 2007, 02:30:52 AM »

Quote

Just from agricultural waste we could provide for all our energy needs.

Amazing as it may be, I think you have overestimated the amount of BS we produce in this country.

Elfie · « **Reply #27 on:** August 05, 2007, 03:21:44 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Amazing as it may be, I think you have overestimated the amount of BS we produce in this country.

Agricultural waste includes, but isn't limited to....Poultry (Offal, Feathers, Bones, Litter, Manure, Protein Meal); Beef (Offal, MDM, Paunch, Bone Meal); Pork (Offal, Manure, Grease); Fish; Hay and other Natural Grasses; Corn Sludge; Spent Hens; Egg Waste; Mushroom Substrate; Onion Skins; Soybean Oil Soapstock. The agricultural waste itself is a very significant source of *waste streams*.

If the agricultural waste isn't enough to satisfy our energy needs, just about any type of waste can be processed with this technology, including plastics, tires and human sewage. Notable exceptions are things that are by their very nature toxic, like nuclear waste.

AKIron · « **Reply #28 on:** August 05, 2007, 09:40:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by RetroVirus
I think you missed me! The US consumes around 20m barrels of oil daily. If we would wean ourselves off 13m barrels worth of that (ethanol, nukes) the remaining 7m barrels from US production would still be in demand.

I was saying that Newt wasn't saying we should wean ourselves of oil but rather only foreign oil. We could easily satisfy our own oil needs without reducing consumption if we were willing to exploit our own resources.

lazs2 · « **Reply #29 on:** August 06, 2007, 08:51:38 AM »

retro... sure seems that building 250 nuke plants and exploring for new oil and using coal and building more refineries will do a lot more for people than anything you have suggested.

If we just stopped using oil for making electricity it would help a lot... if plastic becomes too expensive we might not have so much throw away plastic in packaging... wouldn't break my heart any.

If alcohol becomes cost effective we will use more of it. Fine with me... I can make more HP on it... I can allways use an extra 100 hp or so... thanks.

cafe standards? if people want cars that get better mileage.. they are available right now. no need to mandate anything... an example is... some of the worst mileage vehicles are selling badly. The market will adjust.

lazs