Follow us on...
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Facebook Watch us on YouTube
Register
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 50
  1. #1
    Johnson Rod Pabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.00
    Age
    37
    Location
    Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    4,848
    Last Online

    10.29.09 @ 12:50 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Donor

    Ya know, it sucks living with a tree hugger liberal. Wanna know why?

    This dumbass, drives a Dodge Dakota. Powerful bastard and guzzles gas like a bitch. At the same time, he rips on George W. Bush because he wants to drill for oil. Yeah? Well then why are you bitching? Any liberal that complains about high gas prices can suck it! You bitch about high gas prices, and then you don't wanna make more? Hypocritical it seems. Thanks to Slick Willy and his most unethical administration in the history of the USA, which included Gore, gave us our first energy crysis in 25 years. Don't tell me this is a cycle! This administration didn't do shit about it, denied it's potential problems, along with all the other lies they fed us, and right when this problem was growing, they left it to Bush. Of course, who looks like the bad guy now? Bullshit! This economy is uncontrollably slowing, so why not help the situation and lower the gas prices. Oil groups say the ground has enough oil and coal to last us more than 300 years, and in that time, the ground's cycle will re-produce. This "virgin" land is a nice target, and with today's technology, it remains nearly unnoticed. Even though there is piping, you have to make some sacrafices if you want to live the life you live today. In the world of the SUV and muscle car, you have to give up something. Unless you wanna trade in your truck or convette for a Schwinn, don't bitch!
    CHICAGO WHITE SOX - 2005 WORLD CHAMPIONS

    The Chicago White Sox (1901-present) - The Original SOX - Proof

    The Boston Americans (1901)
    The Boston Somersets (1902)
    The Boston Pilgrims (1903-1906)
    The Boston Red Sox (1907-present) - Proof

    The Pilgrims/Americans/Somersets whatever you want to call them, have NEVER displayed "SOX" anywhere on their caps, jerseys, or merchandise, therefore they shouldn't be referred to as such. However, the White Sox have used "SOX" since 1912.

    The SOX are in Chicago...we just allow the Pilgrims/Americans/Somersets to use the name.

    2007 Fantasy Football Champion

  2. #2
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeL:


    I say save them for when the rest of the world's oil supply is tight. Wait until other countries need our oil. Not only does that make good strategic sense, but it makes good economic sense as well.

    .
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    While that SOUNDS like a nice economic plan for the future, remember, this is the US we're talking about. Other countries will come crying to us about their lack of oil, and our brilliant politicians will simply pay the domestic oil companies out of US tax dollars, and GIVE the oil away, just to show that the US is a 'nice guy'. Just like rebuilding Japan after we nuked them-so we could 'trade with them'. Well, fuck that bullshit, make your OWN stuff, America.

    We are in the unenviable position of having vast amounts of land and vast numbers of cars. While the whole world may have terrible oil prices, other places don't rely on it as much as we do.

    When oil goes up in price, so does nearly everything else, due to increased shipping costs. This is why our economy dives so quickly when oil gets expensive.

    If we wait until the rest of the world is desperate for our oil to decide to drill it, that leaves us in the same situation for how many years/decades/centuries? If you look at how rapidly technology has grown as of late, I think it is safe to assume that the internal combustion engine will be a thing of the past within the next 100 years. The design is a crude one to begin with, in 2001 it is nearly embarrassing compared to other advances, and in 2100 I don't see it being anything but an antique...a hobby. Much like 78 rpm record players.

    I am willing to ASSUME (yes, make of that word what you will) that we will have a much more environmentally friendly form of fuel and/or transportation in 100 years, and will NEVER need to peddle off our oil supplies at increased prices due to the excessive demand/recessive supply. If we begin drilling NOW, we will have a viable source of oil in how long? 5 years? 10? 20? Well, better to start now, because we'll still be relying on it when that time comes.

    When Al Gore came to Pittsburgh a couple years ago, one of the things he talked about was how gas engines are evil, they pollute the air and waste resources. I sat in traffic that day for 4 hours, as his THIRTEEN CAR PROCESSION blocked the Parkway. Now, for one man to speak, and of course a select number of security people, why 13 cars? TEN were LIMOS...not exactly fuel-efficient.

    We have no other options right now short of a large-scale military takeover of select areas of the Middle East. We have to drill now. We can't wait any longer-we should have begun about 10 years ago, and by waiting then, it left us in this situation. Back then, we invaded to protect our supply, but didn't finish the job. Lo and behold: again we are looking at the same scenario.

    I don't want to see another Gulf War; out of the relatively few Americans killed, I knew several of them, as they came from Greensburg, PA. The war indirectly destroyed that town because of one unchecked SCUD missile. Not a good thing.

    There are no short-term solutions, but I can't see us holding out for the world to come begging to us; we'll give the stuff away for a song. The US does not play hardball with foreign policy-it would ruin the image of the 'saviors of liberty' of planet earth that we somehow got.

    I repeat: Drill now, or invade. Aside from complacency, what is option #3?

    [ June 05, 2001 at 01:09 AM: Message edited by: AbeVanHalen ]
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  3. #3
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    This'd be a lot easier if you'd quote properly... but I don't really expect you to get that right either. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

    How am I a hypocrite? And how did what I said about saving our domestic reserves for the future at all tie into the reasons for Pearl Harbor? You're a history minor?! Freshman, right? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

    How would you propose to take an out of work technology worker and teach them how to work in an oil field up in Alaska, Tim? Just up and leave the family for 8 months to go work the oil fields? Uh huh.

    The best way to go about this is to pressure OPEC to increase production. Very little effort has been expended on that, and that would be the most immediate way to lower prices.

    Failing that, we increase domestic production in current oil fields. That will take a bit of time, and wouldn't be as cheap as foreign oil. Oil production has declined by over 17% in the US during the past ten years. At least a portion of that lost production can be recouped.

    I'm all for exploring our untapped reserves. Suggesting that they're the solution to our long-term problems is foolish, though. The only long-term solution is to reduce our oil requirements. Anything else is simply pushing the problem into the future, rather than solving it.

    Gully will be around soon. At least he's smart enough at the game to stay away from facts when he's unsure of them. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    [ June 05, 2001 at 01:11 AM: Message edited by: MikeL ]

  4. #4
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TimPabs1:
    We have enough resources in the ground to last us 300 years! This includes OIL, COAL, NATURAL GAS!

    You're looking at one thing. COMBINED! Pay attention man.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    First you want to talk drilling for oil in Alaska, and now you want to talk all fossil fuel reserves in order to cover your mistake?

    Once again, show me the source. You're uncle simply doesn't count. I've got plenty of uncles, and you won't find me bringing their opinions into this.

  5. #5
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Note than yesterday/today, Iraq has shut down exportation of oil to all but 2 countries. (Turkey and Jordan I think) They want an end called to the UN sanctions imposed on them for about a decade. This is their way of pressuring the UN. The country is mostly dependent upon UN supplies for their survival, yet they still have enough backbone to stop selling oil?

    The US is going to have a hard time convincing OPEC to increase production-we aren't the most popular people in the Arab world. They have us (pun intended) over a barrel, and they know it. I don't see them giving in to our increased demand just to be nice, and I don't the UN or the US gov't giving them what they want, either.

    So, what can we POSSIBLY do to force OPEC's hand? I'm all for it, if there is such an action out there.
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  6. #6
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Oh, by the way, MY uncle told me...

    (nah, forget it....)


    [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    As for sending oil workers to Alaska and having them leave everything behind, that would suck. But this is where the gov't could step in with an incentive plan to help entire families relocate, as well as begin a scholarship program for some students to learn the trade, debt free, provided they actually go and work there for a certain period of time.

    Anyway, with the amazing speed and efficiency of the US gov't, I don't think we'll see ANYTHING happen until gas hits $4 a gallon. (just a random figure, pulled out of my uncle's ass.... [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img])
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  7. #7
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AbeVanHalen:
    When oil goes up in price, so does nearly everything else, due to increased shipping costs. This is why our economy dives so quickly when oil gets expensive.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I agree that it's terribly inflationary. Not just because of shipping costs, but because we're built around automobiles in daily life. Small-business people and folks who just scrape by are feeling the pinch, and prices on other things will soon reflect that.

    What we need is a reasonable solution soon. Oil prices have been remarkably resiliant towards inflation for quite some time. It wasn't but a couple of years ago that I filled the car up at .799/gallon. That was pretty fucking cool. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] One of the reasons that oil prices haven't gone up much until recently is that the Saudies were grateful for our help in the Gulf War.

    I think the US does play hardball when it comes to dealing with other nations. We do scratch a lot of backs, but at the same time most other nations have been forced to pretty much follow our lead. It's a friendly sort of go along to get along situation that the US has maintained for 50+ years now.

    I just can't see how drilling now would alleviate anything in the next ten years. We'll eventually develope those oil fields. That's a given. But I think we need to do it in the right way, at the right time. If we explore for a few years and really find out how to best exploit those resources, we'll be better off in the end.

    I agree about IC engines. Technology will pass them by at some point. Oil will still be quite useful, though. Less than half of a barrel of crude is used to produce gasoline in the US.

    Eventually electrical energy or hydrogen-based fuels will probably provide most of our energy. It's reasonable to believe that the US will be amongst the first to convert to new technologies, at which point we'll be able to use our oil resources in exports, rather than domestically.

  8. #8
    Johnson Rod Pabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    12.08.00
    Age
    37
    Location
    Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    4,848
    Last Online

    10.29.09 @ 12:50 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts


    Donor

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeL:
    This'd be a lot easier if you'd quote properly... but I don't really expect you to get that right either. [img]smilies/tongue.gif[/img]

    Gee, we're not outta arguements now are we? Let's get petty! I went back and edited it. You wouldn't know it unless you were all over my ass waiting for a response like a hungry shark. I'll let you have it when you make a mistake. Isn't that why the edit feature is here? You gonna slam me next when I accidentally spell something wrong? [img]smilies/rolleyes.gif[/img]

    How am I a hypocrite?

    You're telling me I'm thinking only long-term, yet you're doing the same by saying we should procrastinate like Slick Willy did for 8 years, and wait for our International Trade Relations to deteriorate because we cannot give oil because we need it ourselves! In that case, you're thinking with the same philosophy.

    And how did what I said about saving our domestic reserves for the future at all tie into the reasons for Pearl Harbor?

    Don't make me type things twice. Apparently, you're reading only what you want to read. Look up if you have to from when you asked me the first time and I answered you. Holding out will only piss other countries off because they rely on us so much. When our problems rise, so does Japan's, UK's, etc.

    You're a history minor?! Freshman, right? [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

    Senior starting in September. By then...only 60 more hours to go. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

    How would you propose to take an out of work technology worker and teach them how to work in an oil field up in Alaska, Tim? Just up and leave the family for 8 months to go work the oil fields? Uh huh.

    This is a joke right? Ok dude, since you're dislexic, I'll type it again.

    NO OIL = HIGH GAS

    NO JOB = CAN'T AFFORD GAS

    CAN'T AFFORD GAS = NO CAR

    NO CAR = GOOD LUCK

    Was that better?

    The best way to go about this is to pressure OPEC to increase production. Very little effort has been expended on that, and that would be the most immediate way to lower prices.

    Is there an echo in here?

    Failing that, we increase domestic production in current oil fields. That will take a bit of time, and wouldn't be as cheap as foreign oil.

    Is this a gross subtotal? Add on the tariff, and other costs.

    Oil production has declined by over 17% in the US during the past ten years. At least a portion of that lost production can be recouped.

    Once again, is there an echo in here? Thanks to Slick Willy, we're in a hole right now. The past 8 years has been Hell, and it didn't seem that way for you're recogizable "short-term", but 8 years later in the now "long-term", we're suffering. So perhaps in 8 years from now, Bush will be a hero. You'll be paying 85 cents a gallon at the pump like before, and driving a Lincoln Navigator with a "Save The Earth" bumper sticker on it. Can't have it both ways!

    I'm all for exploring our untapped reserves. Suggesting that they're the solution to our long-term problems is foolish, though.

    Do you have any kids? Are you investing money for their futures? College? Oh wait, education isn't important to liberals. Is family? How about retirement? Do you invest in the stock market? I'm sure that's foolish too right?

    The only long-term solution is to reduce our oil requirements. Anything else is simply pushing the problem into the future, rather than solving it.

    You sound like a broken record. But let me correct you. Long-term plans do solve the future. This is why it's called a long-term plan.

    Gully will be around soon. At least he's smart enough at the game to stay away from facts when he's unsure of them. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    I'm not sure if you're calling me ignorant or what, but I think I've mopped your ass in this debate. Once I have you repeating yourself like a broken record, and you're all petty about messing up a quote tag, I think you're in your corner. Ding Ding...Mills Lane says it's over! Damn 5 posts not counting the opening! I was close man! [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    [ June 05, 2001 at 01:11 AM: Message edited by: MikeL ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    [ June 05, 2001 at 01:35 AM: Message edited by: TimPabs1 ]

    [ June 05, 2001 at 01:38 AM: Message edited by: TimPabs1 ]
    CHICAGO WHITE SOX - 2005 WORLD CHAMPIONS

    The Chicago White Sox (1901-present) - The Original SOX - Proof

    The Boston Americans (1901)
    The Boston Somersets (1902)
    The Boston Pilgrims (1903-1906)
    The Boston Red Sox (1907-present) - Proof

    The Pilgrims/Americans/Somersets whatever you want to call them, have NEVER displayed "SOX" anywhere on their caps, jerseys, or merchandise, therefore they shouldn't be referred to as such. However, the White Sox have used "SOX" since 1912.

    The SOX are in Chicago...we just allow the Pilgrims/Americans/Somersets to use the name.

    2007 Fantasy Football Champion

  9. #9
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AbeVanHalen:

    So, what can we POSSIBLY do to force OPEC's hand? I'm all for it, if there is such an action out there.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    You're right that we aren't popular in too many Arab countries, but we are popular in the ones that produce a lot of oil. It's the non-Arab OPEC members that we have less influence over.

    I think the most direct way to force OPEC (and maybe even break it up) to increase production would be to make it known that we might pull our military out of country, and bring them home. That would be something that the Bush administration could probably do for externally exceptable reasons, while twisting the arms of the Arabs.

    Combined with talk of 'easing' (effectively ending) sanctions against Iraq and making arms purchases by Kuwait and SA more difficult, we'd stand a chance of getting what we want. They purchase almost all of their arms from us (with a minority purchasing French equipment) and would fear an Iraq that they are no longer protected from, either through sanctions or military protection.

    None of that would be done publically, though. It'd have to be under the table, where those sorts of things have always been done. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]

  10. #10
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    Tim, I have to repeat and rephrase because you continually miss the point. Whether that's intentional, or that you just don't get it I don't know.

    When I asked you to quote properly, I meant in blocks to that I can easily quote you as well. There's a thread about it in the feedback forum if you need help.

    Abe understood what I was talking about with regards to retraining workers. Macro-economics doesn't apply when you consider we're talking about a small number of people (relatively) and a specific industry. Not to mention that we'd be asking them not only to learn a completely new trade, but having them move into a completely different climate that lacks the infrastructure to support their families. Instead of American workers, we'd likely end up importing aliens with the required skills.

    You can tell me to go re-read your 'point' about PH, but that won't change the fact that it's flawed. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] We denied the Japs resources, which is a wholely different thing than charging them the market rate, which I was suggesting. I'll try to leave the dots closer together for you next time. Need me to sharpen that crayon of yours as well?

  11. #11
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeL:



    It wasn't but a couple of years ago that I filled the car up at .799/gallon. That was pretty fucking cool. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]


    ----&gt;I remember that too; i drove from PA to Florida and back for about $25 total, with the A/C running the whole time!


    I agree about IC engines. Technology will pass them by at some point. Oil will still be quite useful, though. Less than half of a barrel of crude is used to produce gasoline in the US.


    ----&gt;well, kerosene heaters are rare nowadays, so there's still jet fuel to consider. Which, by the way, should be LESS necessary with fax/internet technology decreasing the # of business trips. Then again, gas consumption could be decreased by having more people that COULD work at home, work at home. But if gas is say 40% of a barrel's output, it's still WAY high.

    Eventually electrical energy or hydrogen-based fuels will probably provide most of our energy. It's reasonable to believe that the US will be amongst the first to convert to new technologies, at which point we'll be able to use our oil resources in exports, rather than domestically.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well electrical energy's BEST source is NUCLEAR energy, but somehow I can't see people confodent enough to buy a nuclear car any time soon. As for hydrogen-based fuels, well, those predominantly come from fossil fuels (HYDROcarbons).

    Here's a thought: build a car with a nuclear reactor capable of generating enough electrical current to separate the hydrogen from water, giving off OXYGEN as the 'pollutant', and having a hydrogen-burning engine. This COULD be the wave of the future, but there are a few hitches: 1) until the word 'nuclear' loses its stigma, there is no way the American public is gonna go for it, and 2)until ALL memory of the Hindenberg video is collectively erased, I don't see people wanting a hydrogen tank in their cars.

    While golf carts are fine for 18 holes, we haven't developed batteries capable of high-speed, long-distance trips in an electric car. We can decrease the energy demands by making the vehicle LIGHTER, but that makes it more unsafe in the event of collision. Perhaps magnetic bumpers would help slow things down before impact, but hell-imagine getting your car stick to a dumpster or something. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    What really gets me, is living here in Indy, home of the race-junkies. How much fuel was burned as a result of the 500? Including the race, all practices and qualifying rounds, and all the people that drove in to see it. Now, the race is a BIG waste of gas, but it is a HUGE source of revenue for this city. Most of the people I've come across here are fanatical about racing, but they grumble about the high gas prices. (by the way, the midwest and CA have the highest rates the last I heard). Now, which is it gonna be-racing, or cheaper gas? There is more than one raceway here, too, and racing goes on constantly. The small races do nothing for the economy here. But to suggest that they stop them, or limit them, would get me killed. (racing IS a religion here, no matter what ANYONE says)

    We're in a seeming no-win situation. [img]smilies/frown.gif[/img] [img]smilies/mad.gif[/img]
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  12. #12
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    As for why I jumped on this, seen told me that you wanted to play. I'm game. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    You think you're winning anything here? I'll give you a little star you can take home for you're uncle. [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]

    There's no winning a political thread. This one isn't really about politics, though. I have no idea why you brought Gore into it, Tim. Abe had a point when he did it. Gore's out of government, if you didn't know. This is a good little thread, though. We can talk facts (well, some of us that don't rely on uncle so much) and maybe learn something.

  13. #13
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeL:



    None of that would be done publically, though. It'd have to be under the table, where those sorts of things have always been done. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img]
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Are you suggesting that the US Gov't do something sneaky????? [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]

    I think in the age of the internet, the gov't is stuck doing business more in the open. Unfortunately, if they TRIED to back out of Iraq in order to force an increase of other OPEC members' oil production, the American people wouldn't go for it. Also, there's always a chance that if we tried that, those other countries would simply raise the price of their oil to punish us for leaving them at greater risk, or even THREATENING to.

    It's probably easier to deal with the problem at its source than to explain to the UN and the American people why we're doing it.

    Vietnam 'won' the war on the streets of America, in the classrooms, on the news, and on the Congressional floor. Public opinion is the biggest obstacle America faces. No matter how slowly, clearly, and completely someone would explain that we are going to let Iraq off the hook, how many people here do you REALLY think would understand? What portion of voters? What it comes down to THEN, is that many of our politicians would have to risk not being re-elected in order to do a greater good. Do you see many of them doing that?

    I don't. Not even the ones I sorta like. [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img] [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img]
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  14. #14
    Good Enough
    Join Date
    07.30.00
    Age
    44
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana.
    Posts
    1,746
    Last Online

    12.31.69 @ 04:00 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MikeL:
    [QB]
    There's no winning a political thread. This one isn't really about politics, thoughQB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


    Well, while you were typing THAT, I was just bringing politics into the equation. (just not in the sense that you would expect me to [img]smilies/biggrin.gif[/img])
    Don't bark at me...<b>I</b> didn't name ya.

  15. #15
    Atomic Punk MikeL's Avatar
    Join Date
    02.17.00
    Posts
    11,536
    Last Online

    03.03.15 @ 08:31 PM
    Likes
    0
    Liked 2 Times in 1 Post


    Donor

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by AbeVanHalen:
    Here's a thought: build a car with a nuclear reactor capable of generating enough electrical current to separate the hydrogen from water, giving off OXYGEN as the 'pollutant', and having a hydrogen-burning engine.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Hydrogen burns cleanly, and we could produce it. I can see it being used to fuel most vehicles.

    Everything else should be either wind, hydro, geothermal, or nuclear. Geothermal is becoming more and more attractive for use in homes for heating. Nuclear power is the real solution, though. I don't think it'll take energy prices getting too much higher for people to realize that, though. Especially out west. I'd dearly love to have the money to invest in companies that will build new nuke plants once they become exceptable again.

    Batteries have come a long way the last few years. I had to take one of those new hybrid Toyotas as a loaner (I drive one of those gas-guzzling SUVs [img]smilies/wink.gif[/img]) this winter. It got about 40mpg, which wasn't bad for the way I was driving it. The battery in it was supposed to substantially raise the milage, but was one about 2 feet wide, 9" long, and under 2" deep. It took me a while to find it. [img]smilies/smile.gif[/img] The car didn't have bad acceleration, either. Much like any small 4-door sedan. There was one bad point to it--a very distracting LCD touchscreen in the middle of the dash. I'm a sucker for gadgets like that, and couldn't stop fooling with it.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. If you get to Heaven before I do...just drill a hole and pull me through...
    By Blind Lemon Loons in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02.27.07, 09:40 AM
  2. I'm off to Alaska Fishing for 2 months!
    By Kevy5150 in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 06.20.05, 05:45 AM
  3. Sun is up in Barrow, Alaska -- until August
    By ZeoBandit in forum VH Fans Meeting Place (Non-Music)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 05.10.05, 11:41 AM
  4. Power Drill
    By around2k5150 in forum Guitar Room
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01.15.05, 01:12 PM
  5. mikita drill?
    By 5150 poundcake in forum Guitar Room
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01.12.03, 02:06 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •