If Biden loses, will it be the econony or broken borders?

[Toddsterpatriot]

Hmmmm.... Almost ALL material for Solar comes from China. Waste? It costs money to drill for Oil and ship it. The BENEFITS would far outweigh the Cost of Production. What are they? CLEAN Energy that actually WORKS. Wind and Solar do NOT work.

What benefits?

 

[San Souci]

What benefits?

No pollution. The By-Products of HP are water and oxygen. Clean POWER. If the Krauts could run their Rockets with HP ,no reason we can't run Cars on it.----PS--Have YOU got a solution? Remember ,I also suggested more Nuke Plants and more Dams. (Hydroelectric power)

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No pollution. The By-Products of HP are water and oxygen. Clean POWER. If the Krauts could run their Rockets with HP ,no reason we can't run Cars on it.----PS--Have YOU got a solution? Remember ,I also suggested more Nuke Plants and more Dams. (Hydroelectric power)

What do you mean no pollution? You have to make it.

 

[multivita-man]

Once again. How about China? India? Africa? They pollute 50 times as much as the USA.

1. These countries pollute b/c wealthier countries outsource production to them
2. It's a global problem. Blaming China and India won't help

 

[San Souci]

What do you mean no pollution? You have to make it.

So you have NO solutions to suggest?

 

[San Souci]

1. These countries pollute b/c wealthier countries outsource production to them
2. It's a global problem. Blaming China and India won't help

Well ,I don't really BLAME them for anything. Since I think "Global Warming" is a hoax. Since they won't "Change their ways" ,why should the USA? So ,assuming you care ,what solution do YOU offer? Other than the four I have mentioned?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you have NO solutions to suggest?

I suggest we don't waste money and energy to make hydrogen peroxide.

Nuclear would be a good idea.

 

[San Souci]

I suggest we don't waste money and energy to make hydrogen peroxide.

Nuclear would be a good idea.

I already mentioned Nuclear as my FIRST choice. We already know how to do that. Good suggestion.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I already mentioned Nuclear as my FIRST choice.

And then you ruined it.

 

[San Souci]

And then you ruined it.

How is that? Nuclear would solve the problem short term. We need a long term solution. Or several. How do YOU know HP is hard to produce? Got any FACTS I can look at?

 

[San Souci]

How is that? Nuclear would solve the problem short term. We need a long term solution. Or several. How do YOU know HP is hard to produce? Got any FACTS I can look at?

PS-- Right now ,it IS hard to produce in quantity ,but that is what research is for. Solar and Wind are worthless for the amount of power the USA uses.

 

[otto105]

Yeah I'm afraid they do, uninformed ignoramus

See Ohio and Kansas.

 

[Blisterfinger]

See Ohio and Kansas.

Meh, that was an anomaly fuckup. Got to protect the killing of babies!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

How is that? Nuclear would solve the problem short term. We need a long term solution. Or several. How do YOU know HP is hard to produce? Got any FACTS I can look at?

You ruined it by talking about H2O2.

How do YOU know HP is hard to produce?

I didn't say it was hard to produce. It wouldn't be pollution-free.

 

[San Souci]

You ruined it by talking about H2O2.

How do YOU know HP is hard to produce?

I didn't say it was hard to produce. It wouldn't be pollution-free.

So? It might produce some CO2. That is what research is for.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So? It might produce some CO2. That is what research is for.

https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-03/Hydrogen%20Peroxide%20Supply%20Chain%20Profile.pdf

 

[San Souci]

View attachment 882610

https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-03/Hydrogen%20Peroxide%20Supply%20Chain%20Profile.pdf

I already read that. I said RESEARCH is needed. Also ,research into FUSION Power. These are long term possibilities. Building more Nuclear plants should start right NOW. And all money earmarked for Solar and Wind should be diverted to this R&D.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I already read that. I said RESEARCH is needed. Also ,research into FUSION Power. These are long term possibilities. Building more Nuclear plants should start right NOW. And all money earmarked for Solar and Wind should be diverted to this R&D.

No additional research into H2O2 is needed. Dirty, energy intensive process.

I agree, we don't need more expensive, less reliable wind and solar.

 

[multivita-man]

Since I think "Global Warming" is a hoax.

Yeah, well, science disagrees with you. You're free not to believe in gravity or a heliocentric solar system or that the earth is a sphere, too. To each their own.

Since they won't "Change their ways" ,why should the USA?

Let's flip this around: since the more advanced and wealthier countries aren't changing their ways and aren't going to stop consumption, why should other countries stop manufacturing goods and producing energy for us? We're all at fault, really. It's the economic system that is detached from environmental, scientific reality.

So ,assuming you care ,what solution do YOU offer? Other than the four I have mentioned?

There's only two ways out of this predicament we've created for ourselves: radically reduce our demand for energy consumption on our own, or civilizations collapse. We either do it voluntarily or involuntarily. Frankly, I don't think we have it in us to do the former. No political leader - certainly no leader that depends on votes to remain in power - is going to run on a campaign of lowering our collective standard of living.

I pointed this out to another poster in the energy forum. Biden wants to be the green energy president, yet he's forced to push for record oil production because people freaked out over a 25-40% increase in the price of gas. As green as any leader wants to be, economic reality lurks behind them. I frankly don't think we're going to solve the climate crisis. It's going to solve us.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yeah, well, science disagrees with you. You're free not to believe in gravity or a heliocentric solar system or that the earth is a sphere, too. To each their own.



Let's flip this around: since the more advanced and wealthier countries aren't changing their ways and aren't going to stop consumption, why should other countries stop manufacturing goods and producing energy for us? We're all at fault, really. It's the economic system that is detached from environmental, scientific reality.



There's only two ways out of this predicament we've created for ourselves: radically reduce our demand for energy consumption on our own, or civilizations collapse. We either do it voluntarily or involuntarily. Frankly, I don't think we have it in us to do the former. No political leader - certainly no leader that depends on votes to remain in power - is going to run on a campaign of lowering our collective standard of living.

I pointed this out to another poster in the energy forum. Biden wants to be the green energy president, yet he's forced to push for record oil production because people freaked out over a 25-40% increase in the price of gas. As green as any leader wants to be, economic reality lurks behind them. I frankly don't think we're going to solve the climate crisis. It's going to solve us.

Let's flip this around: since the more advanced and wealthier countries aren't changing their ways and aren't going to stop consumption, why should other countries stop manufacturing goods and producing energy for us?

The US has reduced our CO2 output.

There's only two ways out of this predicament we've created for ourselves: radically reduce our demand for energy consumption on our own, or civilizations collapse.

You really think a couple of degrees is going to make civilizations collapse?
How many new nuclear power plants should we build?