The Executive Ban? It's Gone! <sniker>

[crockett]

Umm yes you can....that's why we have a "NATION WIDE" energy grid.  It's all connected.  The lines are allready ran accross the desert, all you gotta do is connect to them.  I'm also not talking about solar farms of vast solar panels.  I'm talking more about solar towers.  Several thousand mirrors pointing at a single point to creat and store heat.  Clean and efficient use of the land (WICH ISN"T BEING USED ANYWAYS)  Wind turbines require alot more land and cannot stand up to high gusts of wind. 

Nuke plants are the way to go though.  France uses them and they aren't glowing in the dark. 

Our power grids are interconnected by regions, but there is enormous amounts of power lost via the lines into thin air by leakage. It's not efficent to send the power those kinds of distances.

[Shamus]

Resistance is a b....itch 

shamus

[crockett]

I'm not even going to bother with the first part about space anymore.. If you don't think JFK was a major reason for us doing what we did.. well it's no sence arguing with you.

I agree that the price of oil has gone up considerably why Bush has been in office. Yet, if other administrations (including this one) over the last 40 years had done things to push alternatives we wouldn't be in this mess today. It's a chain of failures by multiple administrations that has landed us where we are today. You just hate Bush so it's convenient for you to ignore the previous failures and put it all at his feet.
 

So why is it, now that we know we are in this mess that Bush still can't push alternative energy? Why is it, his only answer is to drill for oil and push ethanol? Again I ask you why is it Bush could push for wind farms in Texas yest wont push for a national plan to clean up our power grid and make us more self sufficient?

That's 5% that we don't have to import and that's assuming there isn't anymore than 5% out there that hasn't been discovered. Solar and wind power can't replace things like lubricants and plastics both of which are derived from oil and our society uses both on a daily basis. Solar and wind power can only replace the electricity we use. Many of our electrical generation facilities are coal powered. Until we can find a replacement for plastics, lubricants and gasoline we are stuck with using oil. Just because those offshore oil deposits will run out we shouldn't use them at all?

Just for the record, I am actually in favor of nuclear power facilities. As someone else has pointed out, France gets the majority of their electricity from nuclear power and it's been quite safe. Only Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island incidents have been major accidents and 3 Mile Island was contained. I'm also in favor of solar and wind power, sure, lets make use of those things because they are an endless source of energy.

Read my other responce to Lard on the 5%..

[Elfie]

If you don't think JFK was a major reason for us doing what we did.. well it's no sence arguing with you.

Public opinion is the major reason JFK did what he did. It all has to do with the Cold War attitudes. No matter who made it to the oval office, it would have been political suicide to NOT do something. Was JFK a good leader in getting the space program moving? Sure he was. Would he have done anything if the Soviets weren't already doing it? Probably not, simply because public opinion wouldn't have demanded that something be done.

So why is it, now that we know we are in this mess that Bush still can't push alternative energy? Why is it, his only answer is to drill for oil and push ethanol? Again I ask you why is it Bush could push for wind farms in Texas yest wont push for a national plan to clean up our power grid and make us more self sufficient?

Why are you asking me those questions? Ask the President himself. He's the only one that knows those answers. I'm not denying that this administration should be doing more to promote alternative sources of energy. I am saying that this is a problem that goes far beyond just this administration, this problem goes back for 40 years or so. There is a lot of blame to be shared by a lot of people, and Bush is just one person amongst many.

We knew this problem could occur at least as far back as the 1973 Oil Embargo and we did virtually nothing since then. From a strategic standpoint, we've known since the start of the Cold War that our supply lines to our energy sources, and those of our western allies, (oil in the middle east) were vulnerable and still did virtually nothing to promote alternate sources of energy. So yeah, laying all the blame at Bush's feet is perfectly reasonable. 

[angelsandair]

I agree that the price of oil has gone up considerably why Bush has been in office. Yet, if other administrations (including this one) over the last 40 years had done things to push alternatives we wouldn't be in this mess today. It's a chain of failures by multiple administrations that has landed us where we are today. You just hate Bush so it's convenient for you to ignore the previous failures and put it all at his feet.

GWB doesn't control the Taxes on oil. It's CONGRESS, for christs sake.

So why is it, now that we know we are in this mess that Bush still can't push alternative energy? Why is it, his only answer is to drill for oil and push ethanol? Again I ask you why is it Bush could push for wind farms in Texas yest wont push for a national plan to clean up our power grid and make us more self sufficient?

Because congress wont let us make more nuclear power plants, congress wont let us drill for more oil, congress will tell GWB and pressure him to do something calling him a nazi, and as soon as he does it, they find something else to rub in his face. Bush doesn't push for ethanol, the democrats and Al Gore does...

[Elfie]

GWB doesn't control the Taxes on oil. It's CONGRESS, for christs sake.

It is a fact that the price of oil has gone up considerably while Bush has been in office. (Whether or not he is directly to blame for every red cent of the price increase is certainly debatable.  )

How many new taxes on oil has Congress implemented since Bush has been in office?

[crockett]

GWB doesn't control the Taxes on oil. It's CONGRESS, for christs sake.

Because congress wont let us make more nuclear power plants, congress wont let us drill for more oil, congress will tell GWB and pressure him to do something calling him a nazi, and as soon as he does it, they find something else to rub in his face. Bush doesn't push for ethanol, the democrats and Al Gore does...

So who's fault was it the last 6 years before the Dem's took control? Dems haven't even had control a year yet but everything is their fault.   

We really need a sheep hearder in here because some of you are seriously out of control..



oh and btw.. when was the last time Congress raised the tax on gas?


oh and another btw... in case you didn't bother to read this full topic.. the whole China drilling in our backyard is a lie and total BS. China has a lease from Cuba but they "ARE NOT" drilling or even building any oil platforms. So get your facts straight and quit passing along lies..

[crockett]

Why are you asking me those questions? Ask the President himself. He's the only one that knows those answers. I'm not denying that this administration should be doing more to promote alternative sources of energy. I am saying that this is a problem that goes far beyond just this administration, this problem goes back for 40 years or so. There is a lot of blame to be shared by a lot of people, and Bush is just one person amongst many.

We knew this problem could occur at least as far back as the 1973 Oil Embargo and we did virtually nothing since then. From a strategic standpoint, we've known since the start of the Cold War that our supply lines to our energy sources, and those of our western allies, (oil in the middle east) were vulnerable and still did virtually nothing to promote alternate sources of energy. So yeah, laying all the blame at Bush's feet is perfectly reasonable. 

Your the one making excuses for him by blaming it on Presidents of the past... See I live in the "here and Now", we know something needs to be done now so why isn't he doing anything?

[Elfie]

Your the one making excuses for him by blaming it on Presidents of the past... See I live in the "here and Now", we know something needs to be done now so why isn't he doing anything?

I look at the big picture, I see failures all down the line, including this administration. You only see failures w/ this administration because your hate for a single man that you most likely have never met, blinds you to all else. Show me where I didn't blame all administrations for the last 40+ years? The failures certainly haven't started with a single man all of a sudden. Selective reasoning at it's worst.

The energy policies of this nation by every administration since the Cold War started have been a failure.

Otoh, it's never to late to do *something*, whether that something is building more Nuclear plants, hydro-electric damns, wind farms, more solar power cells, or even drilling for more oil to help out in the short term. All of those things could be beneficial if we had a government (regardless of party affiliation) that actually gave a damn about something other than themselves.

[Rolex]

Your the one making excuses for him by blaming it on Presidents of the past... See I live in the "here and Now", we know something needs to be done now so why isn't he doing anything?

I don't want him to do anything at all. If he and every politician across the nation took a year-long vacation on an island cut off from civilization, we'd all be better off.

This is ridiculous because we've been through all of this before, as Elfie said.

Oil prices are up because of risk and uncertainty. The risk of war against Iran is maybe 1/3 of the price hike.

The uncertainty about cheap, pumpable supplies and the competition to buy it is another 1/3. Reserve figures have been politicized and manipulated so much that there is uncertainty about them. Iraq has the worlds 2nd largest oil reserve, but five years after the US invasion and occupation, less oil is in the marketplace than before the invasion. Can anyone say with any certainty that there will be investment into the Iraqi oil infrastructure within the next five years, or if any of the oil will be in the market a decade from now?

The debasing of the dollar is the last third. Speculation has little to do with it.

I have to say that it is very interesting to watch the gnashing of teeth in the US about gas prices. Most of the rest of the world has been paying the same price the US is paying now, for decades in some cases. It was more in taxes, but the result at the pump was the same. Prices are not going to decline any significant amount in the foreseeable future. The question is - again and again and again - how will the US addresses it. If some form of subsidy or market aberration is used to reduce the apparent pump price, the country will not be preparing for a more fuel-efficient future that will be forced upon you by high prices.

The higher the price, the sooner you will do something. Get out of the way of the market.

[crockett]

I look at the big picture, I see failures all down the line, including this administration. You only see failures w/ this administration because your hate for a single man that you most likely have never met, blinds you to all else. Show me where I didn't blame all administrations for the last 40+ years? The failures certainly haven't started with a single man all of a sudden. Selective reasoning at it's worst.

The energy policies of this nation by every administration since the Cold War started have been a failure.

Otoh, it's never to late to do *something*, whether that something is building more Nuclear plants, hydro-electric damns, wind farms, more solar power cells, or even drilling for more oil to help out in the short term. All of those things could be beneficial if we had a government (regardless of party affiliation) that actually gave a damn about something other than themselves.

Yet you still can't see the big picture in what I've posted. I'll give you the basic theme... "What are we doing Now". You can sit around are worry about what some guy did 10 years ago or 50 years ago but it will do little to change what needs to be done NOW.

[moot]

I've seen guys with a ton of electrical/physics know-how do some back of the envelope math on the resistence loss problem with solar energy (whatever the solar collection scheme), and the gist of it was that you couldn't power the whole US with just a few states hooked up to the rest of the national grid.  I can't double check or back this up because I can't freakin find the page where the exact math was, but that's what it equated to.
So solar power will be good if you're in the same state, or maybe one state over.. But it doesn't look like it would go much further than that.  Not without much higher working temperatures for superconductors and a big budget to pay for them.

[Elfie]

If he and every politician across the nation took a year-long vacation on a island cut off from civilization, we'd all be better off.

That statement just might have more truth to it than any other statement made in this thread so far. 

[crockett]

I've seen guys with a ton of electrical/physics know-how do some back of the envelope math on the resistence loss problem with solar energy (whatever the solar collection scheme), and the gist of it was that you couldn't power the whole US with just a few states hooked up to the rest of the national grid.  I can't double check or back this up because I can't freakin find the page where the exact math was, but that's what it equated to.
So solar power will be good if you're in the same state, or maybe one state over.. But it doesn't look like it would go much further than that.  Not without much higher working temperatures for superconductors and a big budget to pay for them.

Well current solar panels still waste about 80% of the Sun's energy but they are getting better with time. If we actually invested in the technology like we do oil, we would make much more efficient and cheaper cells. Even though they still only use @ 20% it's still much cheaper energy to produce vs using oil or natural gas and it's renewable unlike oil and gas.

I think the problem with transfer of energy is the line leakage problem. It's nothing really do do with the solar cells, we pretty much couldn't put a bunch of nuclear reactors in one or two states and power the whole country either. No matter if the energy is produced by solar,wind,coal oil or what ever it's still energy the only difference is how it's produced.

That's why I say we should be doing a national campaign to get solar on new houses being built and convert existing if possible. If you had entire neighborhoods producing their own electric you wouldn't need such large solar farms to replace the actual same kilowatts from say a normal power plant.

[Elfie]

Yet you still can't see the big picture in what I've posted. I'll give you the basic theme... "What are we doing Now". You can sit around are worry about what some guy did 10 years ago or 50 years ago but it will do little to change what needs to be done NOW.

When you acknowledge the policy mistakes of administrations other than the Bush administration, I'll stop harping on it. You act like this is a new problem created by Bush himself, it's not. It's a decades old problem.

Will changes happen now? Change is not likely for several reasons. First, change is not something most people are comfortable with. Second, changes will be expensive. When the changes become less expensive than the status quo, then and only then will changes be made. I am also of the belief that neither current parties have the intestinal fortitude to make the necessary changes.

Is that the way it should be? Of course not, but it is the way things are. The only way these things will change is by a 3rd party acting in the best interests of the country.