Interesting post fom another board...

At the momment that may be true but alternatives exsist and will continue to be developed.

In the future you willl be able to plug your car into a meter in every parking place instead of a parking meter.

Charge while you park at work and at home.

If every house had solar and wind capability things would be VERY different.
Someday. Maybe. Meanwhile, right now, here in the real world, if you plug in an electric car, there's a 71% chance it's being recharged by burning something, and another 20% chance it's being recharged by nuclear power.

figes1.jpg


There simply is no renewable source as yet that will scale up sufficiently to replace fossil fuels or nuclear power. I'm not saying we shouldn't explore alternatives, but let's not kid ourselves that electric vehicles do anything besides relocate the problem, mmmkay?

I drive a Prius. I bought it used at a great price. I get about 450 miles to a tank (maybe 500, but I never let it go there) at a price of about 22 bucks to fill up. I can't help but LOVE my savings.

That said, I also know that the impact to the environment to both make the batteries and dispose of them when they die, is huge. I agree with your first assumption about nuclear powered grid systems that could someday efficiently power everything, including transportation. This is where our investment in technologies should be going.

Even though much electrical generation is done by burning fossil fuels, it's still much more efficient than burning gasoline or diesel in your car. As for nuclear, I'd like to see some data that proves the waste from batteries is actually worse that than that from nuclear plants. Battery waste can be neutralized or re-cycled on a chemical basis, nuclear waste cannot. That brings me to my final point which is that the investment in technology should be directed toward fusion power, NOT fission.

ITER - the way to new energy or

Department of Energy - Fusion
 
Even though much electrical generation is done by burning fossil fuels, it's still much more efficient than burning gasoline or diesel in your car. As for nuclear, I'd like to see some data that proves the waste from batteries is actually worse that than that from nuclear plants.
Who said it was? :confused:
Battery waste can be neutralized or re-cycled on a chemical basis, nuclear waste cannot. That brings me to my final point which is that the investment in technology should be directed toward fusion power, NOT fission.

ITER - the way to new energy or

Department of Energy - Fusion
And how far away is that?

There is no one Magic Energy. ALL avenues should be pursued, including existing technologies.
 
Rdean,

Dont waste your time explaining the horrors of war to cowradly, bloated, right-wing cowards. Those of us who have served understand what horror is.

I'm one of those who have served and I call BULLSHIT on your reply and rdeans reply.
Care to tell me what your MOS or AFSC was? Oh and Jehovah's Witnesses don't join the military they are anti government which I do believe that you are a Jehovah's Witnesses. I remember your 144,000 comment.

You rotting, cowardly, vile, disgusting, lying, waste of human flesh. How dare you challenge my service or my patriotism.

notice how he dodges answering the military part......not only is he a lowlife molester he is one of them thar "i served phonies"......
 
Rdean,

Dont waste your time explaining the horrors of war to cowradly, bloated, right-wing cowards. Those of us who have served understand what horror is.

Has Rdean served in combat? For that matter, have you served in combat?

he said he fought in Vietnam in the other thread a few days ago.....ABS asked a few pertinent questions.....and all we saw of Yukon was.....:scared1:.....never seen a poster move so quick.......:lol:
 
But...at the moment they are politically correct.
Liberals feeling good about themselves is all that matters.

or maybe they are currently the best alternative to continuing to put money into the hands of people who give it to people who hate us?

If you'd let us drill for our own oil, we wouldn't have to give the people who hate us so much money, would we?
 
Rdean,

Dont waste your time explaining the horrors of war to cowradly, bloated, right-wing cowards. Those of us who have served understand what horror is.

Has Rdean served in combat? For that matter, have you served in combat?

he said he fought in Vietnam in the other thread a few days ago.....ABS asked a few pertinent questions.....and all we saw of Yukon was.....:scared1:.....never seen a poster move so quick.......:lol:
But don't you DARE question his service! :lol:
 
I have not served in combat and I'm fortunate to say that.

I served in the 3rd Battalion, 16th Field Artillery, 8th Infantry Division from 1975 to 1979 in Baumholder, Germany. I started off as an 82 Charlie, Forward Observer and was transferred into Military Intelligence where I worked for the last two years I served.

I'm glad I didn't see any combat. Most of the officers and many of the enlisted I worked with daily had served in Vietnam. For the few that did talk about the experience, I consider myself lucky that I didn't have to go through that.

And this is why I'm a strong supporter of the military and the need to compensate our military.

No one can tell me the Republicans support our military. Congressional votes are available for anyone who has the inclination to go look. Find out how Republicans have voted the last 10 years in support of our troops and they say, with a straight face, they support our troops. You can't, not with a straight face, it's not possible.

Spitting on Veterans

Unbelievably, the Bush administration opposes—and has even threatened to veto—an updated GI Bill for Iraq war veterans to give those who risk their lives in Bush’s war the same full college benefits the original GI Bill provided for veterans of World War II and Vietnam.

Even harder to believe, Sen. John McCain, the presumed Republican presidential nominee, also opposes the new GI Bill. McCain was a prisoner of war during Vietnam. Unlike Bush and Cheney, McCain actually knows the overwhelming sacrifices made by American soldiers sent into war by politicians.

We can’t really explain McCain’s opposition. We can only report the way he tries to explain it. McCain says he opposes full college benefits for soldiers who serve “only” one enlistment because too many of them might leave the military to attend college. In the course of that one enlistment, a soldier could be sent into active combat in Iraq or Afghanistan as often as three times

Dean.....i believe a BILL FOR THE MILITARY.....should be JUST that.........FOR THE MILITARY....every penny......now why dont you show us all the fucking other bullshit that was in these so-called "MILITARY" bills......and we can see the REAL reason they voted against it......and why did you not mention all the Democrats who vote no on these things?......many of them also believe it shoud be JUST for the Military.....
 
Jesus Christ in Heaven Who the fuck put Rdean in Military Intelligence!?

Do you see how understated McCarthy was that we were overrun with Marxists in our government?

Military Intelligence. Good Fucking Grief! What next TruthMatters was Miss Congeniality?

we had a letter carrier in our office who served 20 in the Navy and this guy was Naval Intelligence.....after you meet the guy and then find out he was in N.I. ......you pause and then go....."this guy was Navel Intel?"......him?......your shitting me ..right?.....HOLY SHIT.....then you start going WOW....:lol:....so yea Dean could be.....
 
Jesus Christ in Heaven Who the fuck put Rdean in Military Intelligence!?

Do you see how understated McCarthy was that we were overrun with Marxists in our government?

Military Intelligence. Good Fucking Grief! What next TruthMatters was Miss Congeniality?

Are you calling me a Marxist?

The only think worse than a Marxist is a Republican. At least Marxists love their country enough to help their middle class, not shit on them like Republicans do in this country.....apologize to any foreign companies lately?

Dean aint a Marxist Frank.....dont insult the Marx Brothers like that....:lol:....
 
First, go tell it to the gays. I'm sure they will clue you in on how conservatives have supported leaving them alone.
It's made up of our neighbors who we elect into office.

i know lots of Democrats out here Dean.....union card carrying follow the Democratic party no matter where it leads....just follow......and many of them are against "gay marriage".....

and they are our neighboors are they?.......maybe at the local level.....Federal?.....yea right....
 
Even though much electrical generation is done by burning fossil fuels, it's still much more efficient than burning gasoline or diesel in your car. As for nuclear, I'd like to see some data that proves the waste from batteries is actually worse that than that from nuclear plants.
Who said it was? :confused:
Battery waste can be neutralized or re-cycled on a chemical basis, nuclear waste cannot. That brings me to my final point which is that the investment in technology should be directed toward fusion power, NOT fission.

ITER - the way to new energy or

Department of Energy - Fusion
And how far away is that?

There is no one Magic Energy. ALL avenues should be pursued, including existing technologies.

Actually when it comes to fruition, most of the others will fall to the wayside. That's why asking how long isn't the right question. We should be doing everything to shorten that time.
 
Even though much electrical generation is done by burning fossil fuels, it's still much more efficient than burning gasoline or diesel in your car. As for nuclear, I'd like to see some data that proves the waste from batteries is actually worse that than that from nuclear plants.
Who said it was? :confused:
Battery waste can be neutralized or re-cycled on a chemical basis, nuclear waste cannot. That brings me to my final point which is that the investment in technology should be directed toward fusion power, NOT fission.

ITER - the way to new energy or

Department of Energy - Fusion
And how far away is that?

There is no one Magic Energy. ALL avenues should be pursued, including existing technologies.

Actually when it comes to fruition, most of the others will fall to the wayside. That's why asking how long isn't the right question. We should be doing everything to shorten that time.
but you shouldn't cut off current supplies when the "magic" energy isn't here yet
 
A lot of people ended up in the service because jail or no job was the alternative. Not sure if that happens anymore. Just saying, military service does not equate to patriotism or a quality human being necessarily. I think you get a better idea when you combine that service with how a person acts here in the site. Several of our members are outstanding individuals and others fall into Yukon's category.
 
Even though much electrical generation is done by burning fossil fuels, it's still much more efficient than burning gasoline or diesel in your car. As for nuclear, I'd like to see some data that proves the waste from batteries is actually worse that than that from nuclear plants.
Who said it was? :confused:
Battery waste can be neutralized or re-cycled on a chemical basis, nuclear waste cannot. That brings me to my final point which is that the investment in technology should be directed toward fusion power, NOT fission.

ITER - the way to new energy or

Department of Energy - Fusion
And how far away is that?

There is no one Magic Energy. ALL avenues should be pursued, including existing technologies.

Actually when it comes to fruition, most of the others will fall to the wayside. That's why asking how long isn't the right question. We should be doing everything to shorten that time.
We should be pursuing ALL avenues at the same time, because there will be no single source of energy that will replace current sources.

Unless you can think of a way to get a container ship across the Pacific without burning something.
 
Liberals feeling good about themselves is all that matters.

or maybe they are currently the best alternative to continuing to put money into the hands of people who give it to people who hate us?

If you'd let us drill for our own oil, we wouldn't have to give the people who hate us so much money, would we?


Unless you're going to nationalize the oil industry, there's no such thing as 'drilling for our own oil'. All the oil drilled goes into the market and we still have to bid on it.
 
or maybe they are currently the best alternative to continuing to put money into the hands of people who give it to people who hate us?

If you'd let us drill for our own oil, we wouldn't have to give the people who hate us so much money, would we?


Unless you're going to nationalize the oil industry, there's no such thing as 'drilling for our own oil'. All the oil drilled goes into the market and we still have to bid on it.

Sadly, That is the inconvenient truth.
 

Forum List

Back
Top