Offshore oil drilling opponents are rethinking

[hawkeyethearcher]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed

[HalJordanFan]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed




LOL!!!

[scott]

We can't drill our way out of this, We have to harness the power of rainbows, pixie dust & unicorn hair.

[biglebowski9999]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed



I don't see anywhere in the article where it said people that protested it have changed their stance. All it mentions is a number of poiliticians (specifically McCain) have flip-flopped their stances. Nothing shocking about a politician flip-flopping on an issue, is there?

[CessnaDriver]

I don't see anywhere in the article where it said people that protested it have changed their stance. All it mentions is a number of poiliticians (specifically McCain) have flip-flopped their stances. Nothing shocking about a politician flip-flopping on an issue, is there?



Ain't a flip when the price of a barrel of oil is up 100 dollars from then.


We are not going to conserve our way out of this, nor alternative energy our way out of this for anytime soon.

Drill.

Drill.

Drill.


It is part of the solution for now. That is fact.
We wont need to do it forever.
But we need to meet the energy needs of this nation now and the immediate future.



Common sense is prevailing now.

These decisions should have been made years ago and we wouldnt be in this situation.

American companys, drilling for American oil, and selling to Americans.

A novel idea no?

Simply supply and demand.

[armitage]

We can't drill our way out of this, We have to harness the power of rainbows, pixie dust & unicorn hair.

LMFAO!:laugh::laugh:

[Ink]

it's still gonna be many years before the price goes down

[CessnaDriver]

it's still gonna be many years before the price goes down


Signifigantly sure, hopefully ramping up infrastructure to support getting that oil will be more of a priority nationally now.

Short term I think we should see prices down some by the end of the year if history is any teacher.

[Makkari1]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed

LOL:laugh:

[Makkari1]

it's still gonna be many years before the price goes down

So we'd better get started now.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Wind, Electric Cars, and drilling.

Check out the Pickens Plan (http://www.pickensplan.com/).

GM had an electric car (called the EV1 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1))which could go 120 miles on a single charge (and would meet the needs of 90% of americans) but was ultimately scrapped as it argued Americans had cheap gas and weren't ready for an Electric Car.

Drilling to keep our dollars in America vs sending it to the Middle East.

[CessnaDriver]

So we'd better get started now.


Yep.
And if we make it a national priority, I am certain Americans can accelerate the processes.

If other countrys had such resources, they would have gone after it long ago.

The wall of reality is even hitting congress now.
That is really something to see....

Top Democrat may back new offshore drilling: report
http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=USN0930217120080709


When I see things like that, I know the tipping point has been reached. Thank god, devil or sun.

[wolverinejedi007]

I saw this on local NJ news which I never watch and they are saying no because it will ruin shore attractions. They say the only way to lower gas prices is to concerve.

I say drill away!!!
The platforns would be 100 miles off shore and you would never see them!!!
I was screaming at the TV!!!

[rilynil]

All I know is that we are in trouble, and all avenues need to be considered. There is no reason the United States should continue to rely on all the lunatics in the Middle East. We should supply our own energy needs and let the Middle East fend for itself on its own merits.

I think the answer is a combination of conservation, drilling and alternative power sources. We need to do it all.

[TNovak]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii238/bluebuckeye/biglebowski.png

[nbr3bagshotrow]

I saw this on local NJ news which I never watch and they are saying no because it will ruin shore attractions. They say the only way to lower gas prices is to concerve.

I say drill away!!!
The platforns would be 100 miles off shore and you would never see them!!!
I was screaming at the TV!!!

That's bunk. Any conservation we can do is absorbed by other oil consumers (e.g. China, India) and the price remains high. Also the Iran nuclear threat (e.g. Israel or US attacks nuclear installations) will keep oil prices high. I also say drill away. Here in Colorado we can drive down I70 and see oil/gas wells all over the place and Colorado's natural beauty is as important as any shore attractions. We all have to make sacrifices to get off this middle east oil dependence.

http://glickreport.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/07/03/how-to-ease-oil-prices/

[CessnaDriver]

People want...

SUVs
cheap gas
pristine natural venues
nothing in their backyard of course
to feel good about the environment.
And most importantly.. not to be bothered with how to do it, and let politicians solve it.


So right there, you have impossible expectations, and several reasons why things are where they are today.

And finally, finally, it looks like just maybe, we will get some common sense compromise for a change to actually do something of substance.

If that happens, I don't mind at all prices having gone up to wake people up. It will be worth it in the long run.

[Brru]

We dont have enough domestic oil for our needs. We would tap it and it would be gone. The military would get (oh and by the way already does get) the first dibs at the oil. This is just another Shiny object. We have the means to change if you just research some of it. HV1 is the perfect example. It isnt talked about anymore because it was done in the 1990's and considered a failure. In the past 10 years we have had a lot of advances in battery technology (hybrid wouldn't have been practical in the 90's either) and in Solar technology. Can't remember the company, but they are in africa and have a photovoltaic with 80% efficiency (which Im even skeptical about, but they seem to be strong). Fuel cells have actually been working much and coming down in price.

All of these right now are in transition. If we dont give in and keep pushing for them. Actually make education a priority (so we can think up cheaper ways of making these things) instead of cost then we will have all of these products in the same amount of time it would take to drill for more oil.

At least then we would have some intelligence in our country, instead of greed.



Yes I am a liberal, terrorist, communist, witch; call me what you want. Black bag me all you want.

[Bullseye]

We can't drill our way out of this, We have to harness the power of rainbows, pixie dust & unicorn hair.

Too ****ing funny lol.

[CessnaDriver]

We dont have enough domestic oil for our needs. We would tap it and it would be gone. The military would get (oh and by the way already does get) the first dibs at the oil. This is just another Shiny object. We have the means to change if you just research some of it. HV1 is the perfect example. It isnt talked about anymore because it was done in the 1990's and considered a failure. In the past 10 years we have had a lot of advances in battery technology (hybrid wouldn't have been practical in the 90's either) and in Solar technology. Can't remember the company, but they are in africa and have a photovoltaic with 80% efficiency (which Im even skeptical about, but they seem to be strong). Fuel cells have actually been working much and coming down in price.

All of these right now are in transition. If we dont give in and keep pushing for them. Actually make education a priority (so we can think up cheaper ways of making these things) instead of cost then we will have all of these products in the same amount of time it would take to drill for more oil.

At least then we would have some intelligence in our country, instead of greed.



Yes I am a liberal, terrorist, communist, witch; call me what you want. Black bag me all you want.



I'm sorry, but your ill-informed. I do not mean that insultingly, do not take it as such.
I do not know where your getting your information but you should be more critical of it.

There are massive amounts of domesstic oil sources that will last for *decades*. And that is the presently known sources.
Also our technology improves in how to get at it.

Just one example.......


North Dakota oil finds a big one
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/04/10/ndoil/

"The Bakken Shale formation extends into Montana and Canada. Geologists now say the area holds hundreds of billions of barrels of oil. As a result, North Dakota will have hundreds of new oil wells in the next few years."



PS
Note that this is NOT an argument against new technologies.
I am for meeting energy needs today and tomorrow.

[rilynil]

We should be thinking beyond "decades." Drilling would help short-term, but it's not the end-all be-all answer.

[armitage]

We should be thinking beyond "decades." Drilling would help short-term, but it's not the end-all be-all answer.

It'll do until the real answer comes along.

[biglebowski9999]

We should be thinking beyond "decades." Drilling would help short-term, but it's not the end-all be-all answer.


Exactly. We need to be more concerned w/ weening ourselves of the addiction to oil...not finding new ways to fuel the addiction (pardon the pun).

[nbr3bagshotrow]

http://www.fool.com/investing/value/2008/07/17/cutting-through-the-energy-myths.aspx

[galactus]

What is the highest demand sector on our oil? In other words, is a majority of the oil used for producing fuel for consumers, fuels for transportation/business, powering plants to produce electricity, some other use...?

[Endless Wake]

Not so fast!

House speaker Nancy Pelosi said she will block any vote to lift the current offshore ban. :buttrock:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/pelosi.interview/index.html

[Primal]

freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/8397/happy0188av5.gif

We can't drill our way out of this, We have to harness the power of rainbows, pixie dust & unicorn hair.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1010/1425737796_46be55c0f6_o.gif

[AsOneDead]

There already are solutions for these problems but the government will never use them. They are too greedy and their connections with the oil tycoons are too "important" for them. It's all about power, this is why the world will crash and burn one day.

[CessnaDriver]

Not so fast!

House speaker Nancy Pelosi said she will block any vote to lift the current offshore ban. :buttrock:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/17/pelosi.interview/index.html


San Fran Nan is so out of touch with reality.
No wonder congressional approval is 9%.

[CessnaDriver]

Exactly. We need to be more concerned w/ weening ourselves of the addiction to oil...not finding new ways to fuel the addiction (pardon the pun).

It's not "addiction".

Were no more addicted to oil then were addicted to drinking water.


It's a necessary resource that drives modern quality of life, and thank god for oil because without it, we could kiss everything around us we take for granted goodbye.

We will move on to the next thing one day,
were getting there. and it aint going to be windfarms for crying out loud. Something revolutionary like nuclear fusion or zero point energy.
But for now, let's let Americans drill for American oil and sell it to Americans.

Crazy concept, but it just might happen now.

[ANGRYCOMICMAN]

Why is everybody blaming the US. China & India are using oil at a greater rate than we are, and less effiencently, at that.
BTW, plastics that are used in almost everything on the planet are made from oil by products.
Everybody should just stop whinning.

[biglebowski9999]

It's not "addiction".

Were no more addicted to oil then were addicted to drinking water.


It's a necessary resource that drives modern quality of life, and thank god for oil because without it, we could kiss everything around us we take for granted goodbye.

We will move on to the next thing one day,
were getting there. and it aint going to be windfarms for crying out loud. Something revolutionary like nuclear fusion or zero point energy.
But for now, let's let Americans drill for American oil and sell it to Americans.

Crazy concept, but it just might happen now.



:rolleyes: It's thinking like this that is directly to blame for the predicament we are in right now. Unfortunately, too many elected officials obviously have shared this narrow-minded view for decades now.

[biglebowski9999]

Why is everybody blaming the US. China & India are using oil at a greater rate than we are, and less effiencently, at that.
BTW, plastics that are used in almost everything on the planet are made from oil by products.
Everybody should just stop whinning.


We use the most...and it's not even close.


http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption

[CessnaDriver]

:rolleyes: It's thinking like this that is directly to blame for the predicament we are in right now. Unfortunately, too many elected officials obviously have shared this narrow-minded view for decades now.


Roll eyes right back at ya.

It's called reality. And people are finally waking up to it.

Vast amounts of our infrastructure require oil.
That wont change over night.

Someday we wont need it so much.
That is a long time away. No matter how hard you wish it to be true.

We have to meet energy needs now.

[CessnaDriver]

We use the most...and it's not even close.


http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption

We also contribute massively to the good of mankind in 1000 ways around the world.
Oil enables that.

Tired of the guilt trip is all.

[biglebowski9999]

We also contribute massively to the good of mankind in 1000 ways around the world.
Oil enables that.

Tired of the guilt trip is all.



No arguments here on that. And that's always been our problem...we're so quick to aid other's in need. So who's helping us out of our current dire situation? Nobody. We need to stop concerning ourselves w/ the problems everyone else has and focus on the serious issues in our own backyard.

BTW, we have 5% of the world's pop and almost 25% of it's energy consumption. You can't attribute all of that ridiculous gap on our philanthropic endeavors and you know it.

[galactus]

Cessnadriver is right in that the main problem with going from Oil to anything else is the infrastructure problem. Even if automobile companies came up with the 100% electric car tomorrow that went 0-60 in 6 seconds, topped out at 150, got 400 miles per charge and cost $25,000, no one would buy it because there's no place to charge it. Now, get each gas station in the country to install some sort of electric "pump" so there's a way to "fuel" electric cars and you might have something. Until then, nothing without gas (oil) is going to work.

[marvelboi77]

Ain't a flip when the price of a barrel of oil is up 100 dollars from then.


We are not going to conserve our way out of this, nor alternative energy our way out of this for anytime soon.

Drill.

Drill.

Drill.


It is part of the solution for now. That is fact.
We wont need to do it forever.
But we need to meet the energy needs of this nation now and the immediate future.



Common sense is prevailing now.

These decisions should have been made years ago and we wouldnt be in this situation.

American companys, drilling for American oil, and selling to Americans.

A novel idea no?

Simply supply and demand.

Wow... Not that I didn't already know that you were a Republican.

[CessnaDriver]

Wow... Not that I didn't already know that you were a Republican.


I am registered independant if you must know.

[ANGRYCOMICMAN]

http://www.bostonblueyes.com/blog/iraq_priceless.gif.gif

[superdoug]

Actually, there are some of us 'hippies' who are still against off-shore drilling. It damages reefs, which are vital to the health of the ocean. Drilling for oil is not a viable long-term solution. Sure it might help in the short-term, but we'll be leaving the effects for our kids to deal with in fifty years, and they don't really deserve that.

I will never agree that offshore drilling is a solution. And I feel like that even when I don't have any money for weed.

[stormshadow75x]

I don't agree with the drilling option either.. from what I've read & heard we will have to wait 10 years to see a barrel of oil produced from the drilling...

I think we seriously need to look at alternative energy sources... wind, solar & nuclear....

I realize nuclear is a touchy subject but due to the current situation it needs to be looked at ....

We've had it easy with oil for a long time now... in europe the prices have always been high but that's from taxes from the gov't ... the idea has always been to try to keep people from relying too much on gasoling....

I'm surprised with this opportunity, american car companies just haven't produced an electric car... the technology is there i just don't get why they wouldn't use this as an opportunity to vigorize the american automobile industry that has been lagging all these years...

[nbr3bagshotrow]

I don't agree with the drilling option either.. from what I've read & heard we will have to wait 10 years to see a barrel of oil produced from the drilling...

I think we seriously need to look at alternative energy sources... wind, solar & nuclear....

I realize nuclear is a touchy subject but due to the current situation it needs to be looked at ....

We've had it easy with oil for a long time now... in europe the prices have always been high but that's from taxes from the gov't ... the idea has always been to try to keep people from relying too much on gasoling....

I'm surprised with this opportunity, american car companies just haven't produced an electric car... the technology is there i just don't get why they wouldn't use this as an opportunity to vigorize the american automobile industry that has been lagging all these years...

Ditto this. If you get a chance, rent "Who killed the Electric Car".

[Bullseye]

Every time someone sneezes in the middle-east oil prices go up and we the consumer suffer. I drive to the office one less day as a result. Fortunately for me I can work from home without any great difficulty although it can be difficult to motivate yourself. There is so much speculation on oil at the moment I cannot see it coming back to normal levels (if ever) for some time.

Regardless of the short term problem the long term solution lies away from the combustion engine. The sooner car manufacturers realise this and governments give incentives to companies to make them and individuals to buy them the better.

I agree with Drew’s statement on infrastructure though. They really need to role these out asap.

[stormshadow75x]

Ditto this. If you get a chance, rent "Who killed the Electric Car".

I saw it... & that's whats so frustrating you got an american industry that's losing so much money & jobs... & they have a chance to change things... they don't...

I have 3 kids & was considering buying a car ... but the way things are going... why would I?? add to the fact that i live in NYC where insurance rates are unbelievable... the hell with it ...

Maybe a new president will change things.... maybe...

[Bullseye]

You have a pretty good public transport system in NYC.

[stormshadow75x]

You have a pretty good public transport system in NYC.

Yea.. that's why I changed my mind.. but it's still tough when you got 3 kids... but oh well I can deal with it....

It's just frustrating the way oil has such an affect on this countries economy... & OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS can't find a way out of the mess

anybody got any news on Chevy's Volt? is that still happening??

[hazmatt]

The answer is not one sided. Drilling alone will not immediately bring down the cost of oil. Developing an alternate source of energy will not immediately bring down the cost of oil.

America needs to send a message to other countries that are exploiting us for our oil dependency by drilling, while AT THE SAME TIME pursuing and refining a technology for an alternative source(s) of energy.

The problem is too large and too widespread to be solved by one 'simple' solution. Regardless of what happens it will take time. There is no overnight solution.

[VinReaper]

We can't drill our way out of this, We have to harness the power of rainbows, pixie dust & unicorn hair.

:laugh:

VR

[pablocruze]

it's still gonna be many years before the price goes down

Just by showing that the USA is stepping up our own production will generate enough "competition" to start driving the price per barrel down...:thumbs2:

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Plus the Chinese are going to be drilling off the Florida coast anyways so what's the point regarding not allowing American companies to drill? I'd rather that oil come to American consumers instead of Chinese comsumers.

The Chinese don't seem to be concerned that it will be 10 years before any oil is seen from that exploration.

[Underdog07]

Seriously though there is no viable "quick-fix" and anyone who thinks one exits is misguided. The easiest stop gap is to obtain more oil from our own lands. We have enough to power our country for nearly a century while an alternate approach is explored and decided upon.

For those who say a temporary oil platform off in the distance will destroy their scenario, think of how hundreds of windmills everywhere, including along prime waterfront locations, will look. Also, what about the environmental impact from the windmills (deaths of thousands of birds).

For those who think Nancy Pelosi has the answer, I point this out: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/house-gop-challenges-pelosi-for-gas-price-plan-2008-04-22.html

Basically Pelosi claimed to have a commonsense answer to high gas prices on April 24, 2006. Unfortunately she would not share it and the GOP sent her a letter requesting her plan pointing out that the price of gasoline has spiked $1.18 since Democrats took over in January and stands at $3.51.

[rilynil]

All I know is that we're in a ****load of trouble. Bad times are coming I believe, times that are going to finally show how moronically petty and short-sighted the Republican/Democrat squabbles are.

[pablocruze]

Yea.. that's why I changed my mind.. but it's still tough when you got 3 kids... but oh well I can deal with it....

It's just frustrating the way oil has such an affect on this countries economy... & OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS can't find a way out of the mess

anybody got any news on Chevy's Volt? is that still happening??

http://gm-volt.com/chevy-volt-t-shirt/

[superdoug]

For those who say a temporary oil platform off in the distance will destroy their scenario, think of how hundreds of windmills everywhere, including along prime waterfront locations, will look. Also, what about the environmental impact from the windmills (deaths of thousands of birds).

Not to start anything, but this claim sounds spurious. Can you provide a link to the study where they've proven this to be a factor in windfarming?

And it's not about aesthetics for me with off-shore oil drilling. It's the proven ecological impact on the oceans, which are undeniably instrumental to the health of the Earth and its atmosphere. :)

[rilynil]

We're all gonna diiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiie, I tell ya!

[rilynil]

:)

[nbr3bagshotrow]

http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343

Aesthetics and Ecological Impact
More serious concerns about wind power center on its aesthetics and environmental/ecological impact. Some people find the sight of wind turbines attractive but many do not, considering them a form of “visual pollution”. The fact that turbines are often located in more remote and sometimes scenic areas can make their appearance more objectionable to local residents.
For example, inhabitants of England’s northwest Lake District region, a large area made up of national parks of striking natural beauty, have been particularly vocal in objecting to wind farms in their backyards, even though the District’s many hills would provide ideal sites for an extensive development. The plan was eventually thrown out 8 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#8).
Perhaps even more pressing than aesthetics, however, are environmental and ecological concerns. Because significant distances must be placed between each turbine in order for wind harvesting to be efficient, turbines are considered to have a large “footprint (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#)” on the ground. Translated into practical terms, this means that, wind farms require far more territory than conventional power plants to produce the same amount of energy 9 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#9). Especially in more remote areas, this footprint can interfere with the local ecology, disrupting the habitats of both plants and animals.
In addition, the action of the blades on a turbine poses serious safety risks to birds, especially during the night. Defenders of the environment feel it is their duty to protect these creatures from harm, because “the seagulls don’t vote” 10 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#10).

[CessnaDriver]

http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343

Aesthetics and Ecological Impact
More serious concerns about wind power center on its aesthetics and environmental/ecological impact. Some people find the sight of wind turbines attractive but many do not, considering them a form of “visual pollution”. The fact that turbines are often located in more remote and sometimes scenic areas can make their appearance more objectionable to local residents.
For example, inhabitants of England’s northwest Lake District region, a large area made up of national parks of striking natural beauty, have been particularly vocal in objecting to wind farms in their backyards, even though the District’s many hills would provide ideal sites for an extensive development. The plan was eventually thrown out 8 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#8).
Perhaps even more pressing than aesthetics, however, are environmental and ecological concerns. Because significant distances must be placed between each turbine in order for wind harvesting to be efficient, turbines are considered to have a large “footprint (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#)” on the ground. Translated into practical terms, this means that, wind farms require far more territory than conventional power plants to produce the same amount of energy 9 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#9). Especially in more remote areas, this footprint can interfere with the local ecology, disrupting the habitats of both plants and animals.
In addition, the action of the blades on a turbine poses serious safety risks to birds, especially during the night. Defenders of the environment feel it is their duty to protect these creatures from harm, because “the seagulls don’t vote” 10 (http://www.globalization101.org/index.php?file=issue&pass1=subs&id=343#10).


They're fugly.
They put up some in my neck of the woods out on an indian reservation in the mountain areas.
I fly, duh Cessnadriver right?
You can see those fugly things waving their "arms" at you many miles away. And that is just one row of them. I would hate to see these things everywhere.
And of course they only work when the wind blows, and they cannot store the energy in giant batterys for when it doesnt blow.


Go for the neighborhood mini nuke powerplant instead.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

They're fugly.
They put up some in my neck of the woods out on an indian reservation in the mountain areas.
I fly, duh Cessnadriver right?
You can see those fugly things waving their "arms" at you many miles away. And that is just one row of them. I would hate to see these things everywhere.
And of course they only work when the wind blows, and they cannot store the energy in giant batterys for when it doesnt blow.


Go for the neighborhood mini nuke powerplant instead.

And we can't go for solar power because the sun sets at night and can't generate power. And no one wants nuclear anywhere close to them. No matter what the type of power source there is always someone arguing against it. That's why no one makes any decisions and we are in this mess.

[CessnaDriver]

And we can't go for solar power because the sun sets at night and can't generate power. And no one wants nuclear anywhere close to them. No matter what the type of power source there is always someone arguing against it. That's why no one makes any decisions and we are in this mess.


Well we end up with compromise.

And I am ok with that, as long as nuclear gets it's shot too.

Without it were screwed.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Well we end up with compromise.

And I am ok with that, as long as nuclear gets it's shot too.

Without it were screwed.

Wind in the midwest/mountain states;
Solar in the Southwest
Ship the trillions of natural gas from the Rockies to the east / west coast for their plants
Drill off the coasts/ANWR/mountain states
Nuclear as a fallback

Electric cars for 90% of the population who only drive about 100 miles / day. The rest of the cars/trucks get gasoline. Everyone has a piece of the pie until a suitable alternative is found.

[pablocruze]

Some interesting reading here (of course, some people will refuse to believe that information here):

Santa Barbara Channel Oil Seepage
http://www.ia.ucsb.edu/pa/display.aspx?pkey=412

and:

Greenpeace Founder says they're wrong to view nuclear energy as 'evil'
A Renegade Against Greenpeace
Why he says they're wrong to view nuclear energy as 'evil'
Fareed Zakaria NEWSWEEK Apr 12, 2008
SOURCE: http://www.newsweek.com/id/131753

[Frinky]

Oil goes up.
HOUSTON (Reuters) - Offshore oil producers in the Gulf of Mexico on Monday geared up to prepare for the first big storm of 2008, but Tropical Storm Dolly looked unlikely to deal a crippling blow to U.S. crude oil and natural gas production.

However, oil markets reacted nervously to news that Shell Oil Co had began flying workers from platforms in the western Gulf of Mexico. U.S. crude oil futures rose $3 to over $132 a barrel earlier on Monday, and were up $1.53 at $130.41 a barrel by 2:10 p.m. EDT (1810 GMT).

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssEnergyNews/idUSN2142079120080721?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0

[biglebowski9999]

They're fugly.
They put up some in my neck of the woods out on an indian reservation in the mountain areas.
I fly, duh Cessnadriver right?
You can see those fugly things waving their "arms" at you many miles away. And that is just one row of them. I would hate to see these things everywhere.
And of course they only work when the wind blows, and they cannot store the energy in giant batterys for when it doesnt blow.


Go for the neighborhood mini nuke powerplant instead.



All things being equal (which they're not, but just for the sake of argument)....what do you think people would rather have in their backyard, windmills or a nuke plant? I'm sure that would be a close race.

And windpower can be stored. Cost has always been the roadblock.

[scott]

Someone tell me when we are going to fly a plane using solar & wind power.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Someone tell me when we are going to fly a plane using solar & wind power.

We all know we arent going get rid of all oil use.

[scott]

We all know we arent going get rid of all oil use.
Tell that to the Goreacle
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn293/scottman/AlGoreAndGlowingOrb.jpg
:banghead:

[CessnaDriver]

All things being equal (which they're not, but just for the sake of argument)....what do you think people would rather have in their backyard, windmills or a nuke plant? I'm sure that would be a close race.

And windpower can be stored. Cost has always been the roadblock.


I don't think people will give a damn what is in their backyard if it is cheap.

[The Watcher]

Someone tell me when we are going to fly a plane using solar & wind power.

Gliders and blimps do have their limitations.

We need to get off this mud-ball and explore the rest of the galaxy!

Government needs to get the hell out of the way and let the inventors and entrepreneurs solve this problem with whatever resources are available. No restrictions. No limitations.

[biglebowski9999]

I don't think people will give a damn what is in their backyard if it is cheap.



WOW. You're serious, too, that's what scares me. People protest when a strip club opens down the street, there is the prospect of a new jail being built near them, a garbage dump, etc. but they are going to open a nuke plant w/ open arms.

Well, now I know that I will never be able to have a serious conversation with you. Thanks for saving me the trouble going forward. We can still discuss Batman, though. :laugh:

[Lizard King]

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-offshore18-2008jun18,0,3372420.story


freakin morons.

i guess they only care about the environment until prices start having an effect on there ability to buy weed

Testify Brother!!:buttrock:

[ANGRYCOMICMAN]

Someone tell me when we are going to fly a plane using solar & wind power.

http://motivac.sopca.com/files/2007/08/dilithium.jpg

[Sniper]

Cessnadriver is right in that the main problem with going from Oil to anything else is the infrastructure problem. Even if automobile companies came up with the 100% electric car tomorrow that went 0-60 in 6 seconds, topped out at 150, got 400 miles per charge and cost $25,000, no one would buy it because there's no place to charge it. Now, get each gas station in the country to install some sort of electric "pump" so there's a way to "fuel" electric cars and you might have something. Until then, nothing without gas (oil) is going to work.


They have to find a way that the fuel cells recharge with solar power, so that while you are driving during the day or park your car the battery will be recharging, they do this we can stop our crack addicted ways towards oil.

[Sniper]

Yea.. that's why I changed my mind.. but it's still tough when you got 3 kids... but oh well I can deal with it....

?

MAn I had two kids and getting around the city was tough on the buses and trains, now with a third I couldn't do it. I bought my wife a little civic 2 door so she can get around with the kids, it's not a electric car but it's a good start.
Funny thing when I bought her the car about 2 years ago to fill it up was 21 dollars, now it 46 bucks ...:banghead:

[stormshadow75x]

MAn I had two kids and getting around the city was tough on the buses and trains, now with a third I couldn't do it. I bought my wife a little civic 2 door so she can get around with the kids, it's not a electric car but it's a good start.
Funny thing when I bought her the car about 2 years ago to fill it up was 21 dollars, now it 46 bucks ...:banghead:

WOW!! from 21 to 46 .... I guess I'll stick to car service

how many times a month do you fill up a tank?

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Cessnadriver is right in that the main problem with going from Oil to anything else is the infrastructure problem. Even if automobile companies came up with the 100% electric car tomorrow that went 0-60 in 6 seconds, topped out at 150, got 400 miles per charge and cost $25,000, no one would buy it because there's no place to charge it. Now, get each gas station in the country to install some sort of electric "pump" so there's a way to "fuel" electric cars and you might have something. Until then, nothing without gas (oil) is going to work.

Rent the documentary "who killed the electric car". Their studies showed an electric car which only went about 120 miles / charge met the needs of 90% of americans who were looking for a car for commuting or for the wife to drive the kids around to school and grocery shopping. Most people don't drive more than that. A second car (which uses gas), or rental, could be used for those who require long drives.

There will always be a need for gas but the main point is to drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

[Bullseye]

Alot of the problem is the size of the car and its engine. Why do women feel they need a jeep or large SUV to drive the kids to school.

[TNovak]

Rent the documentary "who killed the electric car". Their studies showed an electric car which only went about 120 miles / charge met the needs of 90% of americans who were looking for a car for commuting or for the wife to drive the kids around to school and grocery shopping. Most people don't drive more than that. A second car (which uses gas), or rental, could be used for those who require long drives.

There will always be a need for gas but the main point is to drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

And right now that solution may make a lot of sense. As to "who killed the electric car", the market mainly. As long as gas was reasonably priced the investment cost of a second vehicle for short drives only just wasn't worth it for most people. Even if you had two cars anyway, having one that was restricted to 120 mile travel distance without significant time to recharge just didn't make sense when gas was $1.30 to $1.60 per gallon. Now maybe it does, from an economic standpoint I mean.

[TNovak]

Alot of the problem is the size of the car and its engine. Why do women feel they need a jeep or large SUV to drive the kids to school.


Speaking only for myself but we do because we have 5 of them and for about 4 months of the year snow can be 2-3 feet deep at any given time. But I understand your point, not everyone has that situation

[Bullseye]

Speaking only for myself but we do because we have 5 of them and for about 4 months of the year snow can be 2-3 feet deep at any given time. But I understand your point, not everyone has that situation

Of course i can see why some people need 4x4s your wife is a clear example. My own experiance is seeing women in Ireland drive these monsters in towns were parking is limited, roads are narrow and they only have two kids. Its simply to give them the feeling of power and safety. But at what price. If she drove a smaller family car her insurance would be much less, her motor tax would be half and her fuel bills much much smaller.

And the big plus is that less oil and petrol is consumed. We don't have to give up the car we just need to rethink how we employ them.

[CessnaDriver]

WOW. You're serious, too, that's what scares me. People protest when a strip club opens down the street, there is the prospect of a new jail being built near them, a garbage dump, etc. but they are going to open a nuke plant w/ open arms.

Well, now I know that I will never be able to have a serious conversation with you. Thanks for saving me the trouble going forward. We can still discuss Batman, though. :laugh:

What is scarier is irrational fears against logical solutions.

[ANGRYCOMICMAN]

Alot of the problem is the size of the car and its engine. Why do women feel they need a jeep or large SUV to drive the kids to school.

The husbands buy them, for the wives, because they are supposed to be safer.
I would rather have my kids in a tank than a tin can.
This is the mindset, IMO.

[ANGRYCOMICMAN]

http://www.hydro.com/library/images/press_room/news/2006_06/kampanje_300x219.jpg

[CessnaDriver]

The husbands buy them, for the wives, because they are supposed to be safer.
I would rather have my kids in a tank than a tin can.
This is the mindset, IMO.



In America, I think we should be able to buy whatever we like.

If someone wants a tiny car that is electric and has three wheels.

More power to them.

If I want to buy the largest SUV on earth and drive only myself around in it. It's my money, my choice.
If that is part of how I choose to pursue life, liberty and happiness.

Ant it is nothing to judge people over as to how much they care about anything by what kind of car they need or enjoy.

We have a free market in this nation. At least I hope we will. I refuse to remain silent if people wish to dictate to me what I can buy.
And I will resist government that wishes to remove automotive market choices in life.

[Underdog07]

No solution will please everyone unfortunately. Plus there are many who do not wish to compromise at all while longing for an instantaneous cure. Not gonna happen.

Not to start anything, but this claim sounds spurious. Can you provide a link to the study where they've proven this to be a factor in windfarming?


I am shocked that you support windmill farms but have no knowledge of the fact that they kill so many birds. A simple google search would reveal that. :peoples: Thanks NBR for the info on birds. here is some more from http://www.ecologycenter.org/terrain/article.php?id=13594:

***

Wind power is touted by people on all points of the political compass as an answer to growing energy needs and deficits. In 2004 California's wind energy produced enough electricity to light a city the size of San Francisco. Almost all of the state's wind-generating output is located at Altamont, Tehachapi, and San Gorgonio Pass (near Los Angeles); in the '90s, those sites produced almost a third of the world's wind-generated electricity.

Wind energy production costs have decreased four times since 1980, thanks to better technology. Wind power uses less water than other types of energy production (the turbines don't need water to generate their power), and eliminates drilling for natural gas. Relatively pollutant-free and renewable, wind could replace more problematic power sources such as nuclear plants. But nothing comes without a downside: Bird mortality has dogged the industry since the '80s.

Established in 1982, the Altamont Pass Wind Resource Area is the oldest and one of the largest wind farms in the nation. It covers about 73 square miles and over 50,000 acres with approximately 5,000 operating turbines. Every year, the earlier model turbines kill thousands of birds, over half of them raptors, when the birds collide with the spinning blades. The older turbines are far more deadly because they are mounted on towers 60 to 80 feet high, directly in the birds' flight paths, while the newer models stand 200 to 260 feet high, thought to be above where birds of prey normally fly. The older turbines are also less efficient than their newer counterparts, so more are required for the same amount of work.

***

Mortality estimates in Smallwood and Carl Thelander's 2004 report to the California Energy Commission (CEC) top 4,000 birds per year, including 1,300 raptors (an estimated 116 golden eagles, 380 burrowing owls, 300 red-tailed hawks, and hundreds of American kestrels, great horned owls, and ferruginous hawks are killed annually), and others totaling about 40 different species. The kills violate state/federal protection laws such as the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald Eagle and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and several California Fish and Game Code provisions. In 2006 industry consultant WEST conducted monitoring and confirmed raptor death estimates from the 2004 CEC report. In short, Altamont is America's most lethal wind farm.

"I saw a rock dove flying into a rotor plane against a strong wind," Smallwood recalls. "As it approached, the turbulence blew it back, and then the bird tried again.ÊThis time it flew all the way to the rotor plane, where it got struck and knocked about 50 meters away. I thought it was dead and went over to it & but it was still alive and flushed up and flew another 150 meters [before expiring]&.I've seen a ferruginous hawk flying around with half a tail, and a golden eagle with no tail.&

"An unknown number of these birds don't die immediately," Smallwood continues. "They're taken away by scavengers patrolling the area." Injured birds also sometimes manage to remove themselves before dying, creating a "crippling bias," meaning injured birds that crawl away and die aren't accounted for in kill estimates.

***

There are other problems as well. Close examination of the agreement reveals a troubling error: the baseline of 1,300 deaths annually for four raptor species (golden eagle, American kestrel, burrowing owl, red-tailed hawk) was actually the 2004 CEC report figure for all raptor deaths, about 12 species, raising the "permissible" deaths for these four. But even if the real figure (1,100 deaths for the four species) was used, permitting 550 of these raptors to be killed each year is excessive. The agreement may violate the state's endangered species act (for species such as bald eagles) and other sections of the state's Fish and Game Code, in addition to CEQA.

The agreement also changes how the number of deaths is figured. An adjustment factor for dead birds not found by searchers or removed by scavengers (multiplying the number of found carcasses by 3.15) was arbitrarily lowered and capped at 2.5. Rodent trapping is still allowed, though it may be illegal becauseÊwind companies must conduct environmental review and obtain permission from Fish and Wildlife or Fish and Game before commencing such activities. Rodents make burrows critical to the survival of protected species like the San Joaquin kit fox, California red-legged frog, and the burrowing owls that inhabit the area. Advised against in the 2004 CEC report, trapping may actually increase avian mortality because dead rodents attract birds to turbine areas.

***





All in all, is it wrong that I am still longing for a Shelby 500 that gets 11-13 mpg?

[Frinky]

Underdog07 Quote:
I am shocked that you support windmill farms but have no knowledge of the fact that they kill so many birds.

I could live with thousands of dead birds per year. That's a drop in the bucket compared to the damage caused by fossil fuels. There is nothing we can do that will not have some sort of an impact on something or someone. Windmills are better alternative for some areas.

[biglebowski9999]

What is scarier is irrational fears against logical solutions.



You bascially said a town would be just as likely to welcome a nuclear power plant into it's city limits as it would a windmill farm, but somehow I am the one that came off as "irrational?" :laugh:

[biglebowski9999]

The husbands buy them, for the wives, because they are supposed to be safer.
I would rather have my kids in a tank than a tin can.
This is the mindset, IMO.


SUVs are hardly "tanks." Last I checked, they don't put rollover warning stickers on the visors in tanks, lol.

[Underdog07]

You bascially said a town would be just as likely to welcome a nuclear power plant into it's city limits as it would a windmill farm, but somehow I am the one that came off as "irrational?" :laugh:


Which are you closer to and do you derive some of your power from, a windmill farm or a nuclear power plant? (I know the answer to that one). Did that have any input on where you chose to live?

The people in Mass. did not want a windmill farm on cape cod yet they have a nuclear power plant in Plymouth. Why didn't they opt to switch them?

[biglebowski9999]

Which are you closer to and do you derive some of your power from, a windmill farm or a nuclear power plant? (I know the answer to that one). Did that have any input on where you chose to live?

I have both within 50 miles of where I live. I get a bill monthly from the utility company that tells me how much I owe...does your bill give you a breakdown of all the sources your power came from?:sly2: If I had to guess, I would say it's more likely it would come from the nuke plant.

My point was never pro or con for either nuclear power or windmill power. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. My point is no one in their right mind, w/ the choice of having to have one or the other would choose nuclear over windmill. There is way too much negative propaganda associated w/ nuclear.


The people in Mass. did not want a windmill farm on cape cod yet they have a nuclear power plant in Plymouth. Why didn't they opt to switch them?

Those are two different cities. You can't compare them. Isn't Cape Cod heavily reliant on tourism??? I would imagine they wouldn't want either one in their city due to that reason. Shouldn't your question be why didn't they opt for a nuke plant if they didn't want a windmill farm in CC??? (since it seems like you agree w/ Cessna that both options are on equal ground)

[CessnaDriver]

You bascially said a town would be just as likely to welcome a nuclear power plant into it's city limits as it would a windmill farm, but somehow I am the one that came off as "irrational?" :laugh:

If they want a wind farm so be it.

But a city will not work with such solutions.

Or many of the surrounding and ever growing suburbs.

We cannot just meet todays needs. We have to exceed it, because demand will ever increase.

Nukes can meet that need. It is a viable and logical soltuion,.

[michaelt]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYJe12X6T50&NR=1

Nanite technology - Solar Power

[CessnaDriver]

You bascially said a town would be just as likely to welcome a nuclear power plant into it's city limits as it would a windmill farm, but somehow I am the one that came off as "irrational?" :laugh:

If they want a wind farm so be it.

But a city will not work with such solutions.

Or many of the sourrunding and ever growing suburbs.

We cannot just meet todays needs. We have to exceed it, because demand will ever increase.

Nukes can meet that need. It is a viable and logical solution. The smaller neighborhood nukes have many advantages. Think aircraft carrier.

Hell, we have had three sitting in our bay once.

Hook those babies up to the grid when they are not at sea!

[biglebowski9999]

Petition to block lifting the offshore drilling ban, for those inclined:


http://action.environmentaldefense.org/campaign/nooffshoredrilling?rk=hp2O5TMqBM-YW

[Bullseye]

The husbands buy them, for the wives, because they are supposed to be safer.
I would rather have my kids in a tank than a tin can.
This is the mindset, IMO.

Oh I agree that this was the feeling in the past but family saloon cars now for the most part have a very high safety standard.

[nbr3bagshotrow]

Petition to block lifting the offshore drilling ban, for those inclined:


http://action.environmentaldefense.org/campaign/nooffshoredrilling?rk=hp2O5TMqBM-YW

And for those on the other side of the coin:

http://www.americansolutions.com/actioncenter/petitions/?Guid=54ec6e43-75a8-445b-aa7b-346a1e096659