Oil Vs. Alternative Energy

You do know the difference between "barrels" and "gallons" right? Do the math.

Well, well, well, isnt this interesting.

Congress is so concerned about the price of gas that they want to raise taxes on gass by another dime.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25751775/

In the end, the high prices of gas will benefit the country. We will be forced to change our proliferate ways, address environmental problems, and develop new technologies that will make us oil independent.

Then why not add a dollar a gallon in tax if it is so beneficial? Why not $2 or $5.

I am trying to think of a way to afix a sail to my car to use wind power to get back and forth to work.

I say, eat more beans.

Capture the Methane Gas and use it to power your vehicle.

Why has not Bella Palosi thought of that?

You get the same advantage riding a bicycle, at which time, you discover that all winds are headwinds, and the hills are uphill both ways.

Really.

I actually bought a bicycle for Fathers day. A Gary Fisher Tiburon to carry my out of shape *** around on short errands.

Hey, that might be a good idea. We would still be under the EU prices, and the extra money in taxes could be used to fix the infrastructure. My opinion of you has certainly improved.

I don't know the model, but the brand is rock solid. Be careful out there.

Do you know what tacking means? Think you have problems with other people staying in their lanes in traffic now???

I just read about our continued large spending on space projects, such as going back to the moon. Duh, what new things are we going to discover there?

We would be much better off spending that money on efforts to make the USA energy independent.

BTW, what is Boone Pickens going to recommend?

You are 100% wrong there. The prime directive of our species has to be to diversify to other planets as fast as we can, and the benefits of space travel, research, colonization, and exploitation are immense.

The moon isn't near as interesting as the Lagrange points, or taking a trip to the asteroid belt...

Cycloptichorn

ENERGY
We Can Solve It

Today, Texas oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens will testify on "Energy Security" before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. A lifelong oilman, Pickens is in the process of building the world's largest wind farm in Texas, "a $10 billion behemoth that could power a small city by itself." The power from the 4,000 megawatt farm is set to go online by 2011, just three years from now. (By contrast, oil produced through new offshore drilling -- conservatives' panacea to the energy crisis -- would take close to 10 years to reach the market.) "I have the same feelings about wind, as I had about the best oil field I ever found," Pickens told the New York Times. Earlier this month, Pickens released the "Pickens Plan," which advocates expanding wind power and the use of natural gas. "It's our crisis," Pickens says at the end of his first TV spot promoting his plan, "and we can solve it." John Podesta, President and CEO of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, praised Pickens' plan: "It is time to believe in America's ability to solve problems again. With clean energy, we can finally break our dependence on oil."

GORE'S GOAL: Pickens' message echoes the themes of former vice president Al Gore's WeCanSolveIt campaign, launched earlier this spring. Speaking in Washington, D.C. last Thursday, Gore warned, "The survival of the United States of America as we know it is at risk." He called for a new, ambitious goal to derive 100 percent of all American electricity from clean, renewable sources, such as wind, solar, and geothermal power. Calling the goal "achievable, affordable and transformative," Gore declared that the science of global warming requires immediate action. In fact, he explained, the entire North polar ice cap is likely to melt completely in the summer months within five years. "The leading experts predict that we have less than 10 years to make dramatic changes in our global warming pollution lest we lose our ability to ever recover from this environmental crisis," he said. On NBC's Meet the Press Sunday, Gore emphasized the emergency the world is facing. "This climate crisis is threatening our country, threatening all of human civilization," he said. "I know that sounds shrill, and I know people don't like to hear phrases like that, but it is the reality. We have to awaken to it, and we have to mobilize to confront it."

A GORE-PICKENS PLAN: Pickens and Gore approach the issue from two perspectives. Pickens believes that oil production has reached maximum capacity, while Gore is concerned about the pressing disaster of global warming. Yet both problems point to the need for real energy solutions through the implementation of clean, renewable sources. Though Gore notes that his recent speech laid out a goal, not a prescription, there are clear paths towards achieving it. "The United States is the Saudi Arabia of wind power," the Pickens Plan website says. "Building wind facilities in the corridor that stretches from the Texas panhandle to North Dakota could produce 20% of the electricity for the United States at a cost of $1 trillion" -- which would allow for the production of a free, inexhaustible power source and is a bargain compared to the $700 billion the United States spends on foreign oil every year. What's clear to both Pickens and Gore is what is not the answer: drilling for more oil. "This is one emergency we can't drill our way out of," Pickens declares in the plan's first TV spot. Speaking at the Netroots Nation convention this Saturday, Gore commented on the absurdity of increased drilling to address global warming, comparing it to an old remedy for a hangover: "the hair of the dog that bit you." "They'd recommend just going in and having another drink in the morning. That's sort of what that reminds me of," said Gore. "When you're in a hole, stop digging."

CONSERVATIVES STONEWALL: On Meet the Press, Gore remarked, "The only limiting factor here is political will." Achieving Gore's goal or enacting the Pickens Plan won't be easy. Last December, conservatives led by President Bush successfully stripped a measure from the 2007 energy bill requiring a mere 15 percent of American electricity to be generated from renewable sources -- a far cry from Gore's 100 percent goal. Conservatives have attached themselves to former Speaker Newt Gingrich's plan to "Drill Here, Drill Now, Pay Less," despite the fact that expanding domestic drilling "would not have a significant impact" on oil production or gas prices "before 2030," according to the Energy Information Agency. Conservatives still like to mock renewable power. "I'm not entirely convinced," said Rep. John E. Peterson (R-PA) said of Pickens's push for wind power. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) said disparagingly, "You can't run the most heavily industrialized nation in the world on windmills." Last week, Rush Limbaugh claimed it was "very, very sad" that Americans "have bought into this whole notion that alternatives are somehow pristine, clean and pure." These conservatives ignore the fact that, as Gore pointed out, "enough wind power blows through the Midwest corridor every day to...meet 100 percent of US electricity demand."

--americanprogressaction.org

I think what you say is absolute nonsense. Do you have any support for the practicality of your views?

Absolutely. Which one in particular would you like to know more about?

I'll begin with a generalized statement: that creating a viable colony for our species on another planet trumps pretty much every other concern we currently face. We are at the current time extremely susceptable to being wiped out by a planetary disaster, such as an asteroid impact; once we have diversified our base, we will no longer be vulnerable to such a disaster.

Cycloptichorn

Just listen to Al Gore.

The reality is this planet is slowly dying and humans along with it.

Short term we can learn "things" to improve life on this planet while long term, we can perpetuate the species.

None of the other planets in our little solar system is even remotely habitable. At today's speeds, we could reach the nearest solar system to ours in only 30,000 years. Gee, maybe we could increase our speed so that we could reach that system, and whatever is there, in only, say, 1,000 years. I call that encouraging.

Where did you get the idea that we:

A) have to build a sustainable habitat on a planet, or

B) that the entire planet would have to be 'habitable' in order to be colonized?

We have the technology and resources to start a real space station right now, one which is mostly independent of our planet. We have the tech to start a mars base or a moon base. We just haven't done so.

I don't think you have fully considered the possibilities and resources space exploration and exploitation has to offer. There are literally thousands of years worth of metal and volatiles locked up in the asteroid belt, just hanging around, waiting to be mined...

Cycloptichorn

But we do have the capability to build colonies on other planets.