Roxxxanne wrote: [
You would never make it in this city, okie so stop with the sour grapes. It is so transparent. Gosh, even those who live across the bay suffer from San Francisco envy, well, the East Bay anyway, I could very easily live in the North Bay.
I don't desire to make it there, Roxxxanne. And I still have relatives in California that thank their lucky stars every day they don't live in SF. Trust me, not that many people suffer from San Francisco envy. In fact, you are the first person I've ever heard mention such a term.
okie wrote:Roxxxanne wrote: [
You would never make it in this city, okie so stop with the sour grapes. It is so transparent. Gosh, even those who live across the bay suffer from San Francisco envy, well, the East Bay anyway, I could very easily live in the North Bay.
I don't desire to make it there, Roxxxanne. And I still have relatives in California that thank their lucky stars every day they don't live in SF. Trust me, not that many people suffer from San Francisco envy. In fact, you are the first person I've ever heard mention such a term.
Why are they happy that they don't live here, again?
It's just jealousy. That's what you guys say every time we criticize tax cuts for the rich, right? Must be the answer.
Cycloptichorn
okie wrote:Roxxxanne wrote: [
You would never make it in this city, okie so stop with the sour grapes. It is so transparent. Gosh, even those who live across the bay suffer from San Francisco envy, well, the East Bay anyway, I could very easily live in the North Bay.
I don't desire to make it there, Roxxxanne. And I still have relatives in California that thank their lucky stars every day they don't live in SF. Trust me, not that many people suffer from San Francisco envy. In fact, you are the first person I've ever heard mention such a term.
Well, I will say one thing, bigots are not going to be very happy living in this city. But I don't think I have ever met any normal person who visited here and hasn't fallen madly in love with this town. Dissing San Francisco only makes one look like an idiot.
I am not madly in love with any city, to be exact. And whether or not someone loves somebody else's culture or lifestyle has nothing to do with bigotry. Why are you so bugged by the fact that not everyone loves big cities, or thinks San Fran is the cats meow, or your way of life is just the ticket to happiness?
A new alternative energy source has been discovered
There's a new alternative source of energy available. It's inexhaustible, clean, environmentally friendly, safe, and relatively inexpensive. It's called nuclear power plants.
Quick! Tell the Democrats.
Re: A new alternative energy source has been discovered
easyasabc wrote:There's a new alternative source of energy available. It's inexhaustible, clean, environmentally friendly, safe, and relatively inexpensive. It's called nuclear power plants.
Quick! Tell the Democrats.
And you thought SUVs were big now.
Just wait until you put a nuclear power plant in one to make it go.
Re: A new alternative energy source has been discovered
parados wrote:easyasabc wrote:There's a new alternative source of energy available. It's inexhaustible, clean, environmentally friendly, safe, and relatively inexpensive. It's called nuclear power plants.
Quick! Tell the Democrats.
And you thought SUVs were big now.
Just wait until you put a nuclear power plant in one to make it go.
Nuclear power plants could power everything except wheeled vehicles, airplanes, etc. The U.S. can easily produce enough of its own oil to power wheeled vehicles.
once a safe way has been found to either use the "waste material "(i wonder why scientists have not been able to solve that problem) or neutralize it , i would agree that atomic energy might be a good way of providing energy .
burying the waste material and leaving it as a "present" for future generations , is NOT an acceptable solution imo .
if we think that a solution will be found "eventually" , why not put the necessary effort and money into a process to really deal with the problem now ?
i would be interested to learn if scientists actually have a method to deal with the waste properly - reusing or completely neutralizing it .
is it perhaps just a matter of money to make it work ?
my - uneducated - guess is , that atomic powerplant operators just do not want to spend much money on solving the problem - they'd rather BURY it ; it's a cheap solution .
anyone here have any valid scientific information on proper ways to deal with the waste material NOW rather than burying it ?
imo the record of BURYING waste materials such as plain old garbage and chemicals is dismal enough .
i wouldn't want to see any real dangerous materials added to it .
what real solutions does science offer for the re-use of atomic waste materials ?
hbg
Re: A new alternative energy source has been discovered
easyasabc wrote:parados wrote:easyasabc wrote:There's a new alternative source of energy available. It's inexhaustible, clean, environmentally friendly, safe, and relatively inexpensive. It's called nuclear power plants.
Quick! Tell the Democrats.
And you thought SUVs were big now.
Just wait until you put a nuclear power plant in one to make it go.
Nuclear power plants could power everything except wheeled vehicles, airplanes, etc. The U.S. can easily produce enough of its own oil to power wheeled vehicles.
No, we would barely cover half of our present motor fuel needs with current production
http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html
U.S. Crude Oil Production 5,102,000 barrels/day
U.S. Motor Gasoline Consumption 9,253,000 barrels/day (388.6 million gallons/day)
Nuclear power would help, Parados, don't you think? Maybe not?
Too bad the tree huggers killed the industry, or at least set it back at least 25 years.
this SUV got many canadian farmers through the dirty thirties - very fuel efficient !
Quote:Named for Prime Minister R.B. Bennett, a Bennett Buggy was a popular mode of Transportation for impoverished prairie farmers. Unable to afford gasoline, farmers removed the extraneous engine from an automobile chassis and used horses to pull it. The Bennett Buggy became a symbol of disenchantment associated with the Great Depression and the Prime Minister of the time.
prime minister bennett often claimed that prosperity was on it's way - but never said how long it would take to arrive .
Brazil discovers huge field offshore.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=3840469
As the story points out, it could transform Brazil into a major player. Interesting, the possible reserves, 8 billion barrels, are not much different than the possilbe reserves in ANWR. I thought that was minicscule and would contribute little according to Democrats.
So how come we aren't exploring more offshore? Treehuggers will tell you the oil is miniscule and won't matter anyway, just like the huge reserves that are projected to exist in ANWR. Meanwhile with Chinese support, Cuba drills offshore Florida.
http://havanajournal.com/politics/entry/us-embargo-against-cuba-allows-china-to-drill-50-miles-off-florida/
It's still counter-productive. It's still wastefully burning fossil fuels when better solutions could be reached. It will take many years to develop.
It isn't that oil isn't useful and necessary - it is, for a variety of reasons. It just isn't the long-term solution, or even the best middle-term solution for us. Only the short-term is helped by oil, and the more expensive it is, the more incentive for us to develop alternatives which are cleaner and more efficient.
Cycloptichorn
to put it in context, the Brazil discovery is equivalent to 2.5 months of world consumption.
To put it into context, it is one of the major oil fields to be discovered. It is apparently an elephant, as any oil finder or explorationist would tell you. It is major. At a nice million barrels per day, it would last 25 years, and nobody knows for sure at this point how much oil it might possibly produce, it could be more.
As my link points out, the Chinese get it. They also understand how crucial oil is to their economic future. A simple point that many American politicians, mostly Democrats, simply do not understand.
to put it in context another way, we are consuming the equivalent of the Brazil find every 2.5 months.
or to keep pace with demand we have to be finding one Brazil every 2.5 months. We are not, nor anything like it. We are living of huge finds 20 30 40 years ago. Mainly in the middle east. Which explains a lot.
okie wrote:To put it into context, it is one of the major oil fields to be discovered. It is apparently an elephant, as any oil finder or explorationist would tell you. It is major. At a nice million barrels per day, it would last 25 years, and nobody knows for sure at this point how much oil it might possibly produce, it could be more.
As my link points out, the Chinese get it. They also understand how crucial oil is to their economic future. A simple point that many American politicians, mostly Democrats, simply do not understand.
It is not 'major.' You don't seem to understand that without changing the oil-based demand model, we are going to use it all up. Quickly. Adding dribs and drabs doesn't help.
Also, adding additional oil supply does little to nothing to solve the inefficiency problems of the internal combustion engine OR the pollution problems. It's better to kill off several birds with one stone...
Cycloptichorn
Under you guys reasoning, since filling up my car will only last me maybe 400 miles, it is stupid to go to the trouble of going to the gas station when the tank gets low, after all it will only last a very short time. It is a waste of time.
It is also a waste of time to study for one test in the 1st grade, as it will matter little to nothing in terms of graduating from high school.
Do you get the picture? I think you are repeating the mantra of environmentalists and others in regard to oil, and you simply are looking at the situation in a totally wrong way. There has never been an oil field found anywhere in the world that can fuel the entire world very long, that is just the nature of the oil business. Unless you look at maybe the Ghawar field in Saudi Arabia.
Oil exploration must be done to find one field, then another, then another. We really do not know at this point what potential oil still lies undiscovered, but to discard the one greatest energy option ever discovered in the history of the world is to put it mildly, economic suicide and absolute stupidity.
