I am just speculating here, but I think the biggest problem is that there is a leadership vacuum in the United States when it comes to the environment and energy policy. When the Bush Administration decided that they were going to do their big energy pow-wow, they had plenty of things working for them. Global warming was on people's minds. California had rolling blackouts that indirectly put "The Governator" in charge. That giant east coast blackout showed how antiquated the power grid was... They had everything on the side of motivating the country to do something.<br><br>I would say that it was because they were on the wrong side (not the consumer or even citizen's side) of energy and too entrenched, but at the very very very least, we could all agree that there was a huge opportunity missed there. When you leave an argument to the margins like we have with energy over the last thirty years, of course you are going to have marginal opinions come to the forefront.<br><br>Maybe this is too starry-eyed a thing to say, but I think the next president (and I am betting that will be Sen. Barack Obama) will have a lot of power in the bully pulpit. It's not hard to make sense to people on issues as simple as changing a light bulb for economic's sake. Imagine how all of those same zealous cries will sound when someone steps into the leadership position in our country and says, "Okay, let's find out how to do this."<br><br>I'm tellin' ya man... [censored] yeah movement. It can happen. <br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>You totally underestimate our capability.<br><br>We made an A bomb in less than 10 years... in fact in <5 !<br><br>We sent men to the moon in < 10 years... <br><br>we could do it ... even if we failed in a 10 year deadline, we'd be damm close.... so it might take 12 or 14...<p><hr></blockquote><p>Yes we need to start but 10 years? I doubt you or I or anyone reading this forum will see it in our lifetime. Think of the complicated power distribution infrastructure of this country for one, and the limitations of the methods he proposes. There isn't wind, sun, and viable geothermal resources everywhere. And like Llewelyn mentioned it will take years to call off the doomsayers that oppose nukular and other alternatives.<br><br>It's all just more spreading his message of fear.<br><br>I would value Ron's opinion, I'd say he has a clue to the logistics of such a plan if anyone here.<br><br>------>#1 - JD's Trivia game<br><br>------>#2 - MM-MCF Trivia game
Well... I HAVE gone to several wind and solar Web sites and the midsection of the US is ripe for wind energy, and the western states for solar AND geothermal ... we have the best in the world in some categories. Even if it supplied 40-50%, wouldn't that be worth it? Much better than drilling when we only have 2% of the World's oil reserves !<br><br> I agree with NewKojak - we have lacked the leadership to do it. If we'd spent the $3 Trillion on energy development rather than Iraq, we wouldn't need much of their oil !! ... and that $ would serve us for many, many years ! ... the $ in Iraq went down a "rat-hole" and is a temporary fix at best, the whole thing could fall apart tomorrow. (not likely, but I don't think the Iraq War will solve all the problems in that country for a very long time). they've been a mess for 3000 years, and every time a Western power messes with it, it gets worse (aka Britain and France after WW1).<br><br>David (OFI)
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Much better than drilling when we only have 2% of the World's oil reserves !<p><hr></blockquote><p>"The fetish for drilling for ever more oil is the perfect metaphor these days. The first thing you do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."<br><br> Bob Herbert from the New York Times agrees with you Dave [as do I ]the above quote was written after talking to Gore on the phone prior to his speech.... <br> great little editorial..... <br>The following is a great question. <br>When exactly was it that the U.S. became a can’t-do society? It wasn’t at the very beginning when 13 ragamuffin colonies went to war against the world’s mightiest empire. It wasn’t during World War II when Japan and Nazi Germany had to be fought simultaneously. It wasn’t in the postwar period that gave us the Marshall Plan and a robust G.I. Bill and the interstate highway system and the space program and the civil rights movement and the women’s movement and the greatest society the world had ever known.<br><br>When was it?<br><br>Now we can’t even lift New Orleans off its knees.<br>Rest of it is here> <br>I can her the Naysayers now<br><br>
<br>[color:blue]....it will only happen in North America/Europe/mid-East where the expendable wealth is located - maybe we should invite China, too. After that, it needs to be employed in third world countries either in direct aid or through subsidies.......</font color=blue><br><br>Ain't gonna happen under the current economic philosophy.<br>Look how seemingly impossible it has been, to handle relatively simple questions, like cheap generic drugs for 3rd World people.<br>Then consider the absurdity and immorality of patenting life itself and privatizing water.<br>The capitalist profit system itself must be recognized as the danger it is.<br><br>Post WWII (anglo-american) capitalism has completely corrupted the economic base. <br>Banking and investment brokerage, once services to the manufacturing and developing portions of the economy, have become "industries" themselves. Short-term share-holder profit has virtually killed long-term product planning and development. It has also generated huge amounts of imaginary wealth, which itself then gets wielded to buy up and often dismantle existing economic structures. Our trade minister has called the hedge-fonds "locust". <br><br>Do you seriously believe that any manager of a hedge-fond is worth a billion Dollars per year, or that those executive cardbox boxes built in suburbs throughout North America were ever worth millions of Dollars? A few hundred in parts and labour at the most, the rest is pure speculation, which now is showing its clay feet, like the rest of the faux economy.<br><br>Then consider for a moment what the move toward bio-fuel has meant to people around the world. Let'em eat cake?<br>Nope, I believe there will have to be a very dramatic change of system, before we can hope to come up with solutions, instead of mere investment opportunities for the few.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
"Humor ist, wenn man trotzdem lacht" (Humour means laughing despite of it)
I would guess as the Welfare State has expanded. When government didn't survive it was up to the individual to survive, thus given enough hardship anything was possible to the motivated individual. People today expect government handouts, they don't strive for anything, there's a safety net to catch them, so the push to succeed isn't as imperative.<br><br><br>I used to think it was terrible that life was unfair. Then I thought what if life were fair and all of the terrible things that happen came because we really deserved them? Now I take comfort in the general unfairness and hostility of the universe.
_________________________ I used to think it was terrible that life was unfair. Then I thought what if life were fair and all of the terrible things that happen came because we really deserved them? Now I take comfort in the general unfairness and hostility of the universe.
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>People today expect government handouts, they don't strive for anything, there's a safety net to catch them, so the push to succeed isn't as imperative.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Yeah, and you finish up with a nation full of morons in which the genuinely needy are submerged in a sea of bureaucracy while sycophants and spongers take over society.<br><br>km<br><br>
Loc: Pinellas Park, Florida
There isn't wind, sun, and viable geothermal resources everywhere.<br><br>Actually, geothermal is everywhere. There are systems available now for both heating and cooling that use the ground as a plenum rather than the air. It isn't reliant only on volcanic sources anymore. For energy production, yes, you would need to tap into volcanic sources.<br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.