Members Fear My Potato Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 I coulda swore you wouldn't say that stuff Scuby...I've been gone too long. I don't know though, I think there's value to internet discussion like this because it's I wouldn't think of going out and demonstrating on a subject with any massive holes in my point of view. A movement can be killed quickly if it's flawed, but discussion is the key to being more informed and working out those flaws. HC KSS discussion has always been the most interesting of anywhere I've been because only those who actually care participate...collegiate discussion is often contaminated by apathy and laziness. Also, it's a weird cross-section of people. It's boring to throw facts back and forth with Ben Stein. Musician's on the other hand tend to be more abstract and it can take the discussion in strange new directions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 It's just so unfair to caption my truck with a rollover article title. The truck has a 5"/7" drop and couldn't be rolled by a bulldozer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fear My Potato Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by scubyfan It should be a few interesting decades. I want to see how economies are able to sustain themselves when oil becomes economically nonviable. Which countries will be able to make the smoothest transition? Which will suffer the greatest losses? Will any of the doom-and-gloom predictions actually occur or will new advances in technology find further wells or other oil substitutes to smooth the way into a truly alternative energy economy?Only time will tell. Indeed. I predict that's why the current US foreign policy invovles bringing western-style democracy to nations in proximity of oil resources ( http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?050124fa_fact ) not for the sake of US having cheap oil for ourselves, but because when that oil crash happens the US and the west will have the easier time converting over because of our foundation of technology, education, and most importantly capital. We won't need the oil, countries which are still developing like our biggest rival China will need the oil. And by then we'll have US friendly democracies over there in control of the oil. It's a cold war of oil. My problem with the doom-and-gloom predictions is the fact that they all completely ignore the fact that almost all gasoline run, internal combustion engines can be inexpensively modified to run on hydrogen. Yeah we'd have to find a way to mass-manufacture hydrogen, but it's not like every person and company would have to buy new vehicles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fear My Potato Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by Allerian It's just so unfair to caption my truck with a rollover article title. The truck has a 5"/7" drop and couldn't be rolled by a bulldozer. Alright alright but it was fun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Allerian Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by Fear My Potato In fact, did you know that no four door car can pass a side impact safety test at 30mph from an SUV? Not sure you caught this part, but I'm inside the truck. As I said, I have been in a few accidents with trucks. I would choose begin up in a truck any day of the week. It scares me to drive in cars. You can hardly see, and what if a truck hits you!? And while I often sit and wish I had a big muscle car steel beast when I hit a small deer and needlessly lose my hood, grill, bumper, headlights, etc to the {censored}ing thing, I do also realize that in a real car accident that tendency to crumple is a life saver. It's not hard to argue with your results because every crash test out there indicates that crumple zones and such greatly reduce the force put upon the driver. On that point you are totally wrong. What point did I make?Whereas using modern technologies you could design something to prevent the egg from breaking. That's what modern cars are. Yeah, I haven't had good experiences there. Did I mention that in all cases I was able to drive my truck home afterwards becuase it was still fine? I do respect your opinions, I just can't line them up with mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mrcpro Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Back to Arctic drilling..."It's no surprise that polls say two out of three Alaskans stand behind opening up the refuge to drilling. Some say even more residents than this are for drilling in the Coastal Plain. According to Tara Sweeney, government relations manager for the Arctic Slope Regional Corp., an Inupiat tribal holding company, as many as 75 percent of state residents support the measure, including the 90,000-member Alaska Federation of Native Peoples. Supporters say that the environmentalists and the media have distorted the issue by portraying the entire refuge as beautiful when, in fact, the arctic desert of the Coastal Plain is quite charmless, desolate and even unpleasant. Located at the northeastern tip of the Alaska where temperatures can drop as low as 40 below zero F, the Coastal Plain is barren and frozen for nine months of the year and has been described by some as a vast wasteland. A recent article in the Anchorage Daily News, a newspaper that has accused "environmental zealots" of treating Alaska like "a national zoo," claims, "Much of the nation has yet to experience anything like a reality check on the mythical Arctic Serengeti." Another commonly misunderstood fact, say those for ANWR drilling, is the size of the area proposed for drilling. Alaskans on both sides of the issue, the Tribune reports, have expressed their irritation with a political fight over a remote, relatively small region of the state that most Americans - and most Alaskans - never will see. Out of the 240 million acres the government owns, only 0.006 percent would be affected by the proposed Costal Plain drilling. Many Alaskans resent the federal government and the attitudes of Americans who don't live there. The mere 626,000 people in the nation's most sparsely populated state feel as they're being ignored. "I can't understand why they want to control everything. Unless, of course, they want to kick us out," Toni Bowley, who has lived in Alaska for 34 years and runs a general store in Sunshine, said to the Tribune. "We feel like a pawn in this. They don't really care what we think."from www.drilleronline.comWhen I did a google on what Alaskans think about all this, this was the first thing that came up. No, I'm not an oil worker, but I understand that there are two sides to every story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wishfulsinful909 Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by Fear My Potato My problem with the doom-and-gloom predictions is the fact that they all completely ignore the fact that almost all gasoline run, internal combustion engines can be inexpensively modified to run on hydrogen. Yeah we'd have to find a way to mass-manufacture hydrogen, but it's not like every person and company would have to buy new vehicles. I don't know where you got that from.It is a LOT More complicated than that. From http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/energy/nn/nn_rt/nn_rt_hy/article_1144_en.htm Why isn't hydrogen in regular use? * The major drawback to using hydrogen is that it has a very low storage density. A storage tank would have to be 3000 times larger in order to store enough hydrogen gas at atmospheric pressure to drive a car the same distance as one which runs on gasoline. * Hydrogen is more expensive than other energy sources such as coal, oil and natural gas. Why do we need research? * To reduce the cost of hydrogen production; * To solve hydrogen storage problems; * In the long term to integrate renewable energy sources (RES) into hydrogen fuel production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fear My Potato Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Well the inherent problem with what I'm saying is that there will always be steel boxes on the road (as they are necessary for many people, yourself probably included). Crumple zones are safer, but only when everything else has crumple zones. Like I said, nothing with crumple zones can get hit by the steel box. And my car is only hard to see out of because of people who pointlessly own Ford F350s (ambulance chassis?). Large vehicles in pointless abundance make parking lots impossible for me in my little Nissan, until........CHRISTMASTIME! I can squeeze my little car anywhere. Nothing is more satisfying than getting my car between a light post and a huge SUV's driver side at the mall during the holidays. Unfortunately for the SUV ( ) I'm normally only a small distance from them so the driver probably has to crawl over from the passenger side. But the last time I did this the SUV didn't even bother to park straight and was partially in my spot anyway so it's was his fault.I'm just waiting for the guy who will be so pissed he just slams his door open into the side of my car for spite On that day I will be laughing too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fear My Potato Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 But why would store it at atmospheric pressure? Even in that picture they show compressed hydrogen stored under pressure in tanks. And it's more expensive than oil because there isn't much hydrogen being manufactured. Mass-production of hydrogen forced by a lack of oil will drop the price considerably, you can quote me on that. No hydrogen isn't convenient but what else are we going to do when the gas is gone? I always bring up hydrogen in this sort of thing because I was down at Florida Institute of Technology where we are working on a hydrogen powered aircraft. It's nice to be involved in the research and development of this stuff because it's going to make the oil crash a whole lot softer. Hydrogen is our crumple zone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wishfulsinful909 Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Agreed, Potato...it' s COMPLETELY feasible, that's the thing...Hydrogen and Hydrogen power WOULD be CHEAP if the R&D was happening on the same scale with which the Railroads were first built in this country. Here's the rub: think in WHOSE interest it is to NOT have a feul alternative.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by Mike51 Mytigee their soures are quoted. So are michael Moores. Their half thruths are still half-truths.... Originally posted by Mike51 It's not over yet though. I imagine the fat lady has belched her tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sizzlemeister Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by myteeGTi fat lady belched a tune. They're going to drill. Thankfully. I was worried all of those plastic items we consume and dispose of daily would cease to exist. And, damn, but shipping costs for synths would get pretty expensive here shortly. Glad that was averted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members LameAim Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by wishfulsinful909 It's OVER. The Senate has just voted to ALLOW drilling, 51-49 Dems vs. Repubs. I'm disappointed, but not surpised. Lots of people up here want this to happen, for the influx of jobs and revenue to the state. I'm not one of them. My concerns aren't really environmentally based, but rather practical ones. Oil companies tend to go after the reserves that are easily obtainable. The area just opened for drilling in ANWR is not one of those areas. In addition to that, I'm not aware of any solid estimates of the harvestable yield there - just loose guesses. So... higher harvesting costs due to the terrain and placement of the reserve + uncertainty as to how much oil there is in the first place = high likelihood that we'll be right where we started. It's a temporary solution to me. Granted, I'm not up on all of the details but I haven't heard enough to convince me otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hell Bites Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Originally posted by jigg It's rumored right now that Toyota may buy Ford, which would be the best thing to happen to that POS company. Too bad no one's shopping for GM yet. That would be awesome! I hate Ford. Toyota and Honda kick ass. Woot woot:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Hell Bites Posted March 16, 2005 Members Share Posted March 16, 2005 Whether or not the drilling harms a whole lot of animals I think what's really important is the need for alternate fuels. Whether or not drilling is harmful, it costs a substantial amount, money that could be invested in finding alternate fuel sources. Fossil fuels are polluting and we know we're going to hit our peak oil production soon and from then on it'll drop as we fail to meet the rising demands.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Symbiotic Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 I'm happy to be off the oil grid (more or less). I'm running B100 (100%) biodiesel in my new Jetta TDI. Renewable, domestic, sustainable, and best of all - no war required. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Boom Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Originally posted by 3DMC I'm happy to be off the oil grid (more or less). I'm running B100 (100%) biodiesel in my new Jetta TDI. Renewable, domestic, sustainable, and best of all - no war required. If more people did the same the world would be a better place. Kudos to you! BTW VWs rule. I've owned about 20 of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Originally posted by Boom BTW VWs rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pighood Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Yardsticks rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted March 17, 2005 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 the scariest thing about this is the precedent. Now any park or wilderness can be opened to massive drilling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members sizzlemeister Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Originally posted by Mike51 the scariest thing about this is the precedent. Now any park or wilderness can be opened to massive drilling. That's so awesome. There's this park across the street from where I live that has a golf course in the middle of it. Joggers and walkers walk around the golf course. Since it's a public course, you get all sorts of losers there getting drunk and what knot, and some AIM for the people walking/jogging around the course. It's an Olmsted park, it shouldn't have a friggin' golf course in the middle of it. So, if they start drilling for oil there, that would rock. I'd be all for it. Golfing bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted March 17, 2005 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 on the same day they voted to destroy one of the most pristine spots in our nation, they voted NO to increasing veteran medical help.http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00055 amazing. Just amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members mytee2.0 Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Originally posted by Mike51 on the same day they voted to destroy one of the most pristine spots in our nation, they voted NO to increasing veteran medical help.http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00055amazing. Just amazing. you complain SO freaking much, other then posting here non stop with your political shenanigans, are you actually doing anything about anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mike51 Posted March 17, 2005 Author Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 lol. Thats funny coming from bong-boy. This is my first politcal post in a long time. Buzz off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members KeysBear Posted March 17, 2005 Members Share Posted March 17, 2005 Originally posted by Mike51 on the same day they voted to destroy one of the most pristine spots in our nation, they voted NO to increasing veteran medical help. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00055amazing. Just amazing. As I thought, you are on a mission, and a boring one at that. You guys need a new playbook. Scaring people about the environment and going negative on every issue doesn't win elections. Somehow you have to come up with real plans with real thoughts behind them to solve problems like energy, social security, useless educators who demand more money for mediocrity, etc. KeysBear Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.