Independence (Day) from fossil fuels

[Samson]

The drill baby drill mantra drives (drills?) me nuts... I can accept some short term version of Nat Gas, but oil has got to go!!!!

Yeah, "this great nation" (Paylin-speak ;-) has @ 45 of the worlds reserves & uses @ 25% of the worlds energy. It can't last w/o more wars. Conservatives don't seem to want to own up to the fact that wars are expensive. They also don't seem to want to go anywhere near closing loop-holes & subsidies for Big Oil.

So what do you plan on replacing fossil fuels with when you make them illegal?


I'd like to remind you once again there is no Magic Energy.

Please don't make them think too hard.

I'm enjoying the $100/bbl oil prices and continued dependence on Venezuelan and Mexican crude their collective stupidity is causing:

A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the pipeline plan doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, where one fork of the pipeline will end

Read more: EPA raises red flag on plan for Canada-Texas pipeline | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Beginning to build the pipeline before 2012 would create create jobs that would put a dent in unemployment: I wouldn't want Obama to stop shooting himself in the foot. So let's not be so hasty to criticize the moronic dogma of the enviro-wackos.

 

[daveman]

Yeah, "this great nation" (Paylin-speak ;-) has @ 45 of the worlds reserves & uses @ 25% of the worlds energy. It can't last w/o more wars. Conservatives don't seem to want to own up to the fact that wars are expensive. They also don't seem to want to go anywhere near closing loop-holes & subsidies for Big Oil.

So what do you plan on replacing fossil fuels with when you make them illegal?


I'd like to remind you once again there is no Magic Energy.

Please don't make them think too hard.

I'm enjoying the $100/bbl oil prices and continued dependence on Venezuelan and Mexican crude their collective stupidity is causing:

A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the pipeline plan doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, where one fork of the pipeline will end

Read more: EPA raises red flag on plan for Canada-Texas pipeline | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Beginning to build the pipeline before 2012 would create create jobs that would put a dent in unemployment: I wouldn't want Obama to stop shooting himself in the foot. So let's not be so hasty to criticize the moronic dogma of the enviro-wackos.

And so the left once again proves it doesn't actually want us independent from Middle Eastern oil.

 

[westwall]

More elitist talk from the left who want to make energy so expensive that only the rich can afford it. I heat my house with coal every winter. We burn a ton or more every winter. I used to mine coal until the EPA refused us permits.

We are in a wonderful posistion to gain energy indepedence while working on alternatives. No one beileves that coal will last forever but we need to use it while we work on those alternative.

Common sense dictates that we use what we have and work on the energy of the future and thanks to coal we have a long time to work on that alternative.

Leftists don't do common sense.

If Team "Nothing to See Here" had a shred of "common sense," we wouldn't be enduring the perpetual fraud regarding their denial of global resource depletion.

Add Goldman Sachs to the long list of investment banks, think tanks, sovereign governments, oil giant CEOs and petroleum geologists warning that we are at peak, and decline is imminent.

Of course. They make money if a resource is "rare". As RGR has pointed out. How many "peaks" do you get? Everytime the newspapers scream about peak the likes of Goldman and Co. make billions while the poor people take it in the rear end. And you help the thieves to do it. I hope you make a good cut.

 

[Samson]

So what do you plan on replacing fossil fuels with when you make them illegal?


I'd like to remind you once again there is no Magic Energy.

Please don't make them think too hard.

I'm enjoying the $100/bbl oil prices and continued dependence on Venezuelan and Mexican crude their collective stupidity is causing:

A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the pipeline plan doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, where one fork of the pipeline will end

Read more: EPA raises red flag on plan for Canada-Texas pipeline | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

Beginning to build the pipeline before 2012 would create create jobs that would put a dent in unemployment: I wouldn't want Obama to stop shooting himself in the foot. So let's not be so hasty to criticize the moronic dogma of the enviro-wackos.

And so the left once again proves it doesn't actually want us independent from Middle Eastern oil.

Actually, the oil that Canadian crude sent to gulf coast refineries would replace is imported from Venezuela and Mexico...but yes, the Obama administration has added the roadblock to the XL to their absurd limits on Gulf Coast drilling, opening the strategic oil reserve, and reluctance to support fracking to their encouragement of off-shore energy development.

Ironically, the same wacko's that complain about US jobs leaving the US are the same imbeciles that limit the growth of employment in the domestic energy production sector.

 

[Bill Angel]

A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the pipeline plan doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, where one fork of the pipeline will end

Read more: EPA raises red flag on plan for Canada-Texas pipeline | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

There is another approach to shipping the crude oil: by rail:

See : CP Rail eyes slice of crude oil pie

So the oil can get to Port Arthur, and to other refineries, by rail.
The problem is cost:

"According to an industry spokesperson, a ballpark figure to ship oil by rail is $9 - $12 a barrel vs $5 - $7 per barrel by pipeline."

 

[Samson]

A proposed pipeline that would ferry Canadian crude oil to Texas refineries has run afoul of the recharged federal push to protect minorities and the poor from an overburden of pollution.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency says the pipeline plan doesn't evaluate the potential health impacts on Port Arthur, where one fork of the pipeline will end

Read more: EPA raises red flag on plan for Canada-Texas pipeline | Houston & Texas News | Chron.com - Houston Chronicle

There is another approach to shipping the crude oil: by rail:

See : CP Rail eyes slice of crude oil pie

So the oil can get to Port Arthur, and to other refineries, by rail.
The problem is cost:

"According to an industry spokesperson, a ballpark figure to ship oil by rail is $9 - $12 a barrel vs $5 - $7 per barrel by pipeline."

Again, Ironically, much of the premium for shipping oil by rail is the cost of diesel to run the train.....

And we all know what happens when you burn more diesel: Icecaps melt, oceans rise, and soon, Port Arthur is under 10 ft of water.

 

[Dot Com]

pipeline? Just like the conservatives to look for alternate sources rather than look for alternate fuels. '43' was right, you people are addicted.

 

[Samson]

pipeline? Just like the conservatives to look for alternate sources rather than look for alternate fuels. '43' was right, you people are addicted.

Still running around waving your magic wand?



Your dilusions are amusing.

 

[daveman]

Actually, the oil that Canadian crude sent to gulf coast refineries would replace is imported from Venezuela and Mexico...but yes, the Obama administration has added the roadblock to the XL to their absurd limits on Gulf Coast drilling, opening the strategic oil reserve, and reluctance to support fracking to their encouragement of off-shore energy development.

Ironically, the same wacko's that complain about US jobs leaving the US are the same imbeciles that limit the growth of employment in the domestic energy production sector.

They're limiting the growth of employment in ALL sectors.

I can't wait until some fascist asshole suggests legislating that all employers must hire 10% more workers regardless of whether they can afford them or not. It's coming.

 

[daveman]

pipeline? Just like the conservatives to look for alternate sources rather than look for alternate fuels. '43' was right, you people are addicted.

Spoken like someone who thinks that a little solar panel or tiny wind turbine will make us all energy independent.

You really have no idea of the scale involved, do you?

 

[Dot Com]

Of-course i wonder ! Folks don't rely on this.

Rely on what? Independence from fossil fuels, w/ the exception of say, clean-burning natural gas is an economic issue both in independence and markets to be exploited w/ innovation & a national security issue. I don't suspect many conservatives here understand the national security implications of being addicted to fossil fuels because they can't see beyond the short-term gain to be had. I'll give 43 that much, he knew that the country must get off the addiction. I'm not so sure that he wasn't briefed about possible petro- gains from the invasion of Vietraq though

 

[TruthSeeker56]

I notice how none of the conservative posters have addressed the national security issues associated w/ relying on importing oil from the Middle East. This action, by proxy, also enriches people like Wahabbist's in Saudi. Of course the Repubs have no problem w/ Islam?

Apparently "Dot Com" isn't aware of the FACT that only ONE of the top five oil exporters to the United States is in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).

And of course "Dot Com" is not going to address the fact that if it weren't for the enviro-nazis and their Democrat cohorts in D.C., the USA would have been virtually energy independent years ago.

This is typical leftist operating procedure...........create a situation that is detrimental to the safety, security, and well-being of U.S. citizens, then blame the whole thing on the opposition. Childish, and dangerous, behavior.

 

[Dot Com]

I notice how none of the conservative posters have addressed the national security issues associated w/ relying on importing oil from the Middle East. This action, by proxy, also enriches people like Wahabbist's in Saudi. Of course the Repubs have no problem w/ Islam?

Apparently "Dot Com" isn't aware of the FACT that only ONE of the top five oil exporters to the United States is in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).

And of course "Dot Com" is not going to address the fact that if it weren't for the enviro-nazis and their Democrat cohorts in D.C., the USA would have been virtually energy independent years ago.

This is typical leftist operating procedure...........create a situation that is detrimental to the safety, security, and well-being of U.S. citizens, then blame the whole thing on the opposition. Childish, and dangerous, behavior.

AGAIN. You just don't GET IT!!! This thread is about independence from fossil fuels. I see two cons "liked" your post too

​

 

[westwall]

I notice how none of the conservative posters have addressed the national security issues associated w/ relying on importing oil from the Middle East. This action, by proxy, also enriches people like Wahabbist's in Saudi. Of course the Repubs have no problem w/ Islam?

Apparently "Dot Com" isn't aware of the FACT that only ONE of the top five oil exporters to the United States is in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).

And of course "Dot Com" is not going to address the fact that if it weren't for the enviro-nazis and their Democrat cohorts in D.C., the USA would have been virtually energy independent years ago.

This is typical leftist operating procedure...........create a situation that is detrimental to the safety, security, and well-being of U.S. citizens, then blame the whole thing on the opposition. Childish, and dangerous, behavior.

AGAIN. You just don't GET IT!!! This thread is about independence from fossil fuels. I see two cons "liked" your post too

​

Actually I'm a Dem, I just prefer sane environmental and economic policies. I can show you case after case where environmetalists caused far more harm then the supposed "problem" they were trying to address. Just like you. Coal is abundant and cheap. Yet your choice is to ban its use (effectively) and cause the economy to collapse all for the "greater good". The rich once again will do fine in your perfect world but the poor, who you supposedly care about get screwed yet again.

Just admit it, you hate the poor and wish they were gone.

 

[Dot Com]

Apparently "Dot Com" isn't aware of the FACT that only ONE of the top five oil exporters to the United States is in the Middle East (Saudi Arabia).

And of course "Dot Com" is not going to address the fact that if it weren't for the enviro-nazis and their Democrat cohorts in D.C., the USA would have been virtually energy independent years ago.

This is typical leftist operating procedure...........create a situation that is detrimental to the safety, security, and well-being of U.S. citizens, then blame the whole thing on the opposition. Childish, and dangerous, behavior.

AGAIN. You just don't GET IT!!! This thread is about independence from fossil fuels. I see two cons "liked" your post too

​

Actually I'm a Dem, I just prefer sane environmental and economic policies. I can show you case after case where environmetalists caused far more harm then the supposed "problem" they were trying to address. Just like you. Coal is abundant and cheap. Yet your choice is to ban its use (effectively) and cause the economy to collapse all for the "greater good". The rich once again will do fine in your perfect world but the poor, who you supposedly care about get screwed yet again.

Just admit it, you hate the poor and wish they were gone.

Coal is also a source of mercury pollution among others:
coal power: wastes generated | Union of Concerned Scientists

Waste created by a typical 500-megawatt coal plant includes more than 125,000 tons of ash and 193,000 tons of sludge from the smokestack scrubber each year. Nationally, more than 75% of this waste is disposed of in unlined, unmonitored onsite landfills and surface impoundments.

Toxic substances in the waste -- including arsenic, mercury, chromium, and cadmium -- can contaminate drinking water supplies and damage vital human organs and the nervous system. One study found that one out of every 100 children who drink groundwater contaminated with arsenic from coal power plant wastes were at risk of developing cancer. Ecosystems too have been damaged -- sometimes severely or permanently -- by the disposal of coal plant waste.

 

[westwall]

AGAIN. You just don't GET IT!!! This thread is about independence from fossil fuels. I see two cons "liked" your post too

​

Actually I'm a Dem, I just prefer sane environmental and economic policies. I can show you case after case where environmetalists caused far more harm then the supposed "problem" they were trying to address. Just like you. Coal is abundant and cheap. Yet your choice is to ban its use (effectively) and cause the economy to collapse all for the "greater good". The rich once again will do fine in your perfect world but the poor, who you supposedly care about get screwed yet again.

Just admit it, you hate the poor and wish they were gone.

Coal is also a source of mercury pollution among others:
coal power: wastes generated | Union of Concerned Scientists

Waste created by a typical 500-megawatt coal plant includes more than 125,000 tons of ash and 193,000 tons of sludge from the smokestack scrubber each year. Nationally, more than 75% of this waste is disposed of in unlined, unmonitored onsite landfills and surface impoundments.

Toxic substances in the waste -- including arsenic, mercury, chromium, and cadmium -- can contaminate drinking water supplies and damage vital human organs and the nervous system. One study found that one out of every 100 children who drink groundwater contaminated with arsenic from coal power plant wastes were at risk of developing cancer. Ecosystems too have been damaged -- sometimes severely or permanently -- by the disposal of coal plant waste.

Yes it is. And it is still a cleaner source of power than any of the "green" options. The "green" energy producing systems all require expensive and rare elements to produce.
Try looking up how the people in the Third World are fairing mining the minerals needed to produce the "green" energy machinery. They are dying in droves so you can feel good about yourself.

Everything we use for our modern society has a cost. Coal is so far the cheapest in both cost and environmental damage (if controlled properly) then anything else out there. Windmills are great till you look at what is emitted in their production.

No environmental damage is permanent. There are however many (too many) abandoned holes in the ground that will not be repaired because the controls we have today weren't in existence when the polluters were doing their damage. That has stopped in the First World.

The environuts also love to trot out the tired old "peak oil" mantra. Guess what the "green" energy systems will hit their peak long before oil will. Lithium (an essential element in almost all "green" systems) is actually pretty rare and will run out within 25 years at current usage.

 

[RGR]

The environuts also love to trot out the tired old "peak oil" mantra.

Well, maybe the really dumb ones. I think once a human being gains functionality in more than 5 brain cells, even they aren't stupid enough to trot that pony out anymore. They can still be an environut of course, they just aren't stupid enough to fall for the cult of peak oil at that point.

 

[Dot Com]

Actually I'm a Dem, I just prefer sane environmental and economic policies. I can show you case after case where environmetalists caused far more harm then the supposed "problem" they were trying to address. Just like you. Coal is abundant and cheap. Yet your choice is to ban its use (effectively) and cause the economy to collapse all for the "greater good". The rich once again will do fine in your perfect world but the poor, who you supposedly care about get screwed yet again.

Just admit it, you hate the poor and wish they were gone.

Coal is also a source of mercury pollution among others:
coal power: wastes generated | Union of Concerned Scientists

Waste created by a typical 500-megawatt coal plant includes more than 125,000 tons of ash and 193,000 tons of sludge from the smokestack scrubber each year. Nationally, more than 75% of this waste is disposed of in unlined, unmonitored onsite landfills and surface impoundments.

Toxic substances in the waste -- including arsenic, mercury, chromium, and cadmium -- can contaminate drinking water supplies and damage vital human organs and the nervous system. One study found that one out of every 100 children who drink groundwater contaminated with arsenic from coal power plant wastes were at risk of developing cancer. Ecosystems too have been damaged -- sometimes severely or permanently -- by the disposal of coal plant waste.

Yes it is. And it is still a cleaner source of power than any of the "green" options. The "green" energy producing systems all require expensive and rare elements to produce.
Try looking up how the people in the Third World are fairing mining the minerals needed to produce the "green" energy machinery. They are dying in droves so you can feel good about yourself.

Everything we use for our modern society has a cost. Coal is so far the cheapest in both cost and environmental damage (if controlled properly) then anything else out there. Windmills are great till you look at what is emitted in their production.

No environmental damage is permanent. There are however many (too many) abandoned holes in the ground that will not be repaired because the controls we have today weren't in existence when the polluters were doing their damage. That has stopped in the First World.

The environuts also love to trot out the tired old "peak oil" mantra. Guess what the "green" energy systems will hit their peak long before oil will. Lithium (an essential element in almost all "green" systems) is actually pretty rare and will run out within 25 years at current usage.

Notice how I provided proof for my assertion and you.....well.....

 

[Dot Com]

The environuts also love to trot out the tired old "peak oil" mantra.

Well, maybe the really dumb ones. I think once a human being gains functionality in more than 5 brain cells, even they aren't stupid enough any more to trot that pony out anymore. They can still be an environut of course, they just aren't stupid enough to fall for the cult of peak oil at that point.

I mention that the U.S. has 4% of the worlds oil reserves so Palin's "Drill baby drill" mantra won't alter that.

 

[dustythedog]

Drill Baby Drill, hell yes for the short term lower gas prices will help get us out of this recession.But here's another thing that can help. Require all new buildings to have enough solar panels to provide say 10% of their energy consumption. I'm not a scientist, and it may not be feasible in all buildings or all areas of the country. How hard would it be to put a wing turbine on a house, like we use on RVs. This would make one hell of a stimulus project. Tax credits for existing homeowners yes, low or no cost loans from the Government, yes. But secure those loans with liens that stay with the property until it's sold, But, One Big Catch. Every nut, bolt, solar panel. must be Made in the U.S.A. Take the old Maytag, G.M., & ford factories and & put America back to work. Small businesses would sprout up all over, people have to install the panels, maintain them, sell them, ship them! Jobs with meaning, and dignity At least Americans would get a Bang for their Buck. No it won't replace oil, nothing will in the near future. But hydrogen is looking better every day!
Dusty the dog