We're not doing enough!

Posted by: Mike

We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 05:44 AM

Now that the Saudis have turned him down...<br>[color:blue]"It's not enough. It's something but it doesn't solve our problem," Bush said. "One of the interesting things about American politics is, those who are screaming the loudest for increased production from Saudi Arabia are the very same people who are the fighting the fiercest against domestic exploration, against the development of nuclear power and against expanding refining capacity."</font color=blue><br><br> Kinda sums it all up , doesn't it? <br><br><br>[color:blue][/b]Hodie mihi. Cras tibi.</font color=blue>[/b]
Posted by: DLC

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 06:28 AM

The word "conservation" is NOT in his dictionary (of 50 wurds) <br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: newkojak

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 07:59 AM

He's right on one count and wrong on two.<br><br>I would love to see Bush have a live debate with the masses "screaming" against nuclear power development and expansion of refining capacity. Maybe then we could actually see him on TV fighting with the voices in his head.<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U
Posted by: Celandine

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 08:22 AM

Now I know how Obama feels about Bush's PinHeaded BS!<br>He's just Baiting the Environmentalists (He IS a MASTERBAITER)<br><br>NO To NUKES, NO TO Oil Exploration, NO TO Off-Shore & Delicate <br>Ecosystems, and NO to Sloppy Refinery Processes that kill everyone <br>and three generations of their family.<br><br>Can I just POUND Him while I explain that we, The same DUMASSES <br>that've been objecting to ALL-OF-THE-ABOVE, were ALSO ADVOCATING <br>CLEAN, RENEWABLE ENERGY & SUSTAINABLE LIVING ALL ALONG? <br><br>[color:white]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . </font color=white><br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: carp

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 11:35 AM

Well you can't have it both ways because the problem is NOW - today.<br><br>So some caribou and some skeeters will be inconvenience while we drill for oil in the Alaska wilderness - Even drilling and like renewable energy is years down the road, if the US wanted to, we should have started this drilling 5 years ago.<br><br>[color:blue]The same DUMASSES <br>that've been objecting to ALL-OF-THE-ABOVE, were ALSO ADVOCATING <br>CLEAN, RENEWABLE ENERGY & SUSTAINABLE LIVING ALL ALONG?</font color=blue> - are these the same dumasses that say no to building wind farms and ocean generated turbines?? Catch 22 of sorts they want renewable and yet they do not want it in their back yards or anywhere for that matter.<br><br><br>
Posted by: newkojak

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 12:16 PM

Maybe we can get all the straw men in this thread to fight it out. <br><br>Let me throw one more in there... we wouldn't have all this trouble if all those Nazi-appeaser NASCAR dads and latte-sipping gun-toting bible-bangers would let us have some damn open container laws... people wouldn't have to drive anywhere to have a good time!<br><br>It's all thems people!<br><br>Anyhow... let's go back to Bush argument and look at all three parts.<br><br>ANWR - Bush had majorities in both houses and couldn't pass this thing because he didn't have all of the Republican support. If he's going to complain about obstructionists, he should start in his own party on this one and find some convincing reason why we should reverse course on half a century of protecting these places.<br><br>Nuclear Power - The Bush Administration's first actions when entering the White House were to stop all pending EPA litigation against the dirtiest of coal plants. That way, coal-burning plants were (and are) shielded from the real cost of their operation due to all of the pollution they may freely create. This also made all those old coal plants virtual gold mines and took away any incentive for power companies to move away from them. I wish Bush was right and it was just a matter of convincing people to accept nuclear, but no power company has even tried to build one. It's just too profitable to burn dead dinosaurs.<br><br>Refinery Capacity - The same goes here. The oil companies love tight supplies because they inflate prices. If you want to know why we don't refine more gas, just watch the refiners' stock price. There is no other reason. As for the pollutants that refineries produce, they can be taken care of, but it costs money. So if you're a refiner here are your two options: keep the status quo and watch the value of your product go up, or expand refinery operations with some new (and cleaner) investment and end up producing something that will get you less money. In a free market, you would think, "Hey, but wouldn't the next company want to make more of it cheaper and compete?" Since the 90s, there has been no other guy. Most of the market is controlled by five companies.<br><br>So Bush is really giving a few people a whole lot of credit here.<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U
Posted by: Celandine

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 01:47 PM

<br>obviously not<br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: carp

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 01:58 PM

[color:blue]Most of the market is controlled by five companies.</font color=blue> - Well true in the US however the big five does NOT control the price per barrel OPEC does. However even if the price per barrel is 140 or 60 bucks, the big five still makes huge profits. Now I believe every company should make money and stay healthy but what they pull in is mind staggering over the top.<br><br> [color:blue]The oil companies love tight supplies because they inflate prices.</font color=blue> - Sure that age old supply and demand thingy - But really the oil companies would love to expand capacity because this equals company growth, have more sell more, plus increased assets via infrastructure investments - inflated prices does not grow a company per say.<br><br>Bottom line;<br>Even the big five just cannot go out and build more refineries or drill for more oil with out environmentalist getting in the way. As I mentioned above the environmentalist even block "renewable energy" installations.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 08:33 PM

<br>Obviously you can't include ALL Environmentalists<br>since I don't recall objecting against Wind Farms,<br><br>But in the case of people that might object to them <br>Spoiling the View; we, I can understand in in the<br>case of Hawaii arguably one of the most beautiful <br>places on the face of God's Green Earth...<br><br>But may I ask (haven't checked yet) why they don't<br>have plans in the development for harnessing the<br>thermo dynamic heat of the volcanos? I mean, power<br>plants designed to blend into the scenery that could<br>conceivably produce enough cheap electricity to<br>power the entire Island?<br><br>And in the case of Islands that no longer have volcanic<br>action, why are they trying to harness WIND rather <br>than Wave Action or Current Turbines for power?<br><br><br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: electricron

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 09:10 PM

Obviously you can't include ALL Environmentalists since I don't recall objecting against Wind Farms, But in the case of people that might object to them <br>(1) Spoiling the View; we, I can understand in in the case of Hawaii arguably one of the most beautiful places on the face of God's Green Earth...<br>(2)But may I ask (haven't checked yet) why they don't have plans in the development for harnessing the thermo dynamic heat of the volcanos? I mean, power plants designed to blend into the scenery that could<br>conceivably produce enough cheap electricity to power the entire Island?<br>(3) And in the case of Islands that no longer have volcanic action, why are they trying to harness WIND rather than Wave Action or Current Turbines for power?<br><br>Answers to all three points, but I'll admit I'm not an expert on Hawaii.<br><br>(1) First, wind farms are cheap, off-the-shelf technology, and Hawaii has lots of winds.<br>(2) Hawaii power tried to build a thermal plant before, but can't, cause the volcanoes are in US National Parks.<br>(3) The very first underwater turbines are just now being built off the coast of Ireland. The technology isn't quite off-the-shelf nor commercial yet. Also, the sea shelfs around Hawaii are deep with steep drop offs, the seas off Ireland are shallow and relatively flat. <br><br>Look at the different physical properties of the landscape and determine which is cheaper to build. Wind farms make more sense in Hawaii than underwater farms. The steep and tall mountains help increase the winds. The steep and deep seas work against water farms. I agree that geo thermal plants should work well in Hawaii engineering wise, but the National Park designation makes building industrial processes there politically impossible.<br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: electricron

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/18/08 09:54 PM

Conservation has reduced power consumption in America much more than many realize. Have you checked out America's power usage lately?<br><br>Electricty consumption hasn't grown much.<br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 07:53 AM

Wow, Ron... I have to hand it to you- you ARE a great source of information. I am shocked by the data. I thought it was skyrocketing.. but at the same time I have to look at all the low wattage bulbs we have around our house... we have done lots to conserve... too bad my electric bill doesn't reflect it !! <br><br>Thanks, buddy.<br>Regards,<br><br>David (OFI)<br><br>PS Thought of you last week while visiting Eureka Springs, AR. Took a short train ride there and the ride was neat, but the best part was the Conductor , Travis... full of trivia and stories... he was great. The railway car was an old 1924 Pullman... cool place.
Posted by: polymerase

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 08:10 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>(3) The very first underwater turbines are just now being built off the coast of Ireland. The technology isn't quite off-the-shelf nor commercial yet. Also, the sea shelfs around Hawaii are deep with steep drop offs, the seas off Ireland are shallow and relatively flat. <p><hr></blockquote><p> Plus the fact that Hawaii has virtually no tides. You need a land mass for the tide to run into like the Bay of Fundy or around Ireland to get some decent sized tides. <br><br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 09:37 AM

That's why I was quick to suggest facilities that either enhance<br>or better yet, that are all but totally melded into the landscape.<br>Disguised as just another mountain peak hidden beneath rubble<br>removed to excavate the underground facility.<br><br>Philippines to try and harness sea currents for energy<br><br>[color:green]"...or am I a butterfly that's dreaming she's a woman?"</font color=green> [color:green]. . . _ _ _ . . .</font color=green><br>
Posted by: newkojak

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 09:38 AM

Some environmentalists, right?<br><br>I'm arguing here against the moronic simplistic argument that Bush is making. There are significant market forces behind the prices we pay to the electric company and at the pump that need fixing. The Bush Administration and the Republican majorities in congress made these problems worse during their tenure and I hope that shifting blame over to a few environmentalists who carry so much less political power than a single lobbyist only turns voters off to these people even more.<br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U
Posted by: DLC

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 12:21 PM

Someone told me that the issue of ANWAR is quiet now because the oil companies are slant drilling from the current Alaskan field into it? <br><br>Is that possible? are they that close ??<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 12:51 PM

the problem is NOW - today<br><br>And all of the "solutions" proposed by GW and Co. would take years to accomplish, would benefit the few, and would only be short term. Makes me wonder just what was agreed to in that closed door meeting with the Dick. <br><br>
Posted by: electricron

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 01:05 PM

That close door meeting with Dick was SEVEN years ago.<br>If the Anwar was tapped 7 years ago, the first drop of oil would be flowing today.<br><br>But fuel prices dropped 7 years ago, and no one listened.<br><br><br><br><br><br>
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 01:10 PM

But the so called Bush "energy policy" was set by those meetings. Even if we had gone into ANWAR, the benefits would still be minimal and short term. Petroleum is not an infinite resource. We will run out of the stuff eventually. Do we wait and then panic, or do we wean ourselves off of it well before the supplies are gone?<br><br>
Posted by: electricron

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 01:37 PM

You build other power plants using different fuels when the technology has matured and prices have equalized.<br><br>Wind turbine technology has matured, although the price to produce from wind farms hasn't quite equalized yet with fossil fuels. But, if natural gas and oil prices keep rising, that break-even point rapidly approaches. You build the windfarms where they are the most efficent, not where there isn't enough winds less than half the year.<br><br>There's other technologies on the horizon. But before commerical usage, the technology has to mature. A few test units, upsizing, and redesigining; eventually you get something that's profitable to build and operate. Like underwater tubines.<br><br>Meanwhile, you continue to use what is commercially available and profitable today. It's easy to state a goal to reduce emissions 80%, but you don't madate it with a law when the commercially available technology reduces emissions only 75%. <br><br>Corporations aren't into being the state-of-the-art. Corporations look at value for their bucks, And that usually means building and operating what's commercially available. <br><br>The Pentagon and NASA are into building and operating the latest state-of-the-art equipment. They, and therefore we, pay a high premium for it.<br><br>Do you go out and buy the top most Mac Pro to get the latest and greatest state-of-the-art computer? Or do you, like most of us, buy the latest and greatest iMac, or lesser computer?<br>
Posted by: DLC

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 01:45 PM

One thing I'm surprised that no one has done is to convert the tons of cellulosic waste to alcohol...<br><br>now several organisms possess enzymes to digest cellulose... the hind gut of termites contains a protozoan that can do it... several species of fungi can do it... so why hasn't some biotech cloned that enzyme into E coli and then you can grow 10,000s of liters of bugs and siphon off the solution with glucose to make ethanol? <br><br>Sure it's no cakewalk but with todays genetic techniques- I'm shocked no one has done it.<br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 02:13 PM

Do you go out and buy the top most Mac Pro to get the latest and greatest state-of-the-art computer? Or do you, like most of us, buy the latest and greatest iMac, or lesser computer?<br><br>Of course not. First, I'd never be able to use 10% of what a top of the line Mac can do. Secondly, I'll be using my 8 1/2 year old G4 for quite some time to come. In the event that it does need replacing, I'll consider a MacBook or Mini, either would suit my needs. So, how do you explain the people who go out and buy themselves a huge SUV just to drive it to and from work?<br><br>[edit] I try not to use whatever is unnecessary. We're a consumer society and we're told , constantly, that we must buy the biggest, fastest, most expensive object or we're not good enough. Well, it ain't so.<br><br><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by MacBozo on 05/19/08 05:28 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Posted by: newkojak

Re: We're not doing enough! - 05/19/08 02:31 PM

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/URjeS5-NaXY&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/URjeS5-NaXY&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object><br><br>-- Cee Bee Double-U