what's your take on america's energy future?

i been reading boone pickens PickensPlan seems really, really, really interesting his idea is to generate wind power, we have enough to supply 20% of americas power take the 20% we use now on natural gas, use that for cars, and we do have nat gas cars now, about $1/gallon equivilent, and stations in ur area as well... we reduce our oil consumption down more than half we spend 700 billion on oil per year, and since our big oil companies only have like 5% of world supply, most of that money goes over to other countries... and alot of them we fight against i think $4/gallon gas is good, its starting us to talk abot and really think about change... $5-6 will be even better and move us along faster in the end we'll be better off i think we do need a diverse strategy, and to also tap our own oil sources overall, i feel very positive for the future

 

I think we should all be good libtards and listen to whatever Al Gore tells us.

 

Libtards. Now, that's clever.

Personal responsibility and commitment to a sustainable lifestyle is the ideal aim for America's energy future.

 

Politicians in Massachutcess said no to wind turbines off Nantucket Island.

Something about Jack's sacred saling grounds or some blather.

 

As long as the current powers in Washington are in power, they will push upon us the hysteria of an oil shortage and use this as an excuse to wage war around the world in pursuit of it. It affects food prices and the ability to stay warm in the winter.

How long are YOU going to put up with it?

The future of transportation is solar, not hydrocarbon based fules and internal combustion engines.


x

 

The fact is wind, solar and hydroelectric power are all outdated and inefficient technologies for use on a mass scale. I am all for REAL alternatives to oil. At the same time, I have done enough research to know that the world is not even close to running out of oil and won't be for many hundreds of years, considering that it isn't abiotic to begin with (much evidence shows that it is). There are massive oil fields all over this planet that remain untouched. There is enough oil on the northern slope of Alaska to supply the United States alone with oil for the next 200 years at least. So all this talk about "peak oil" (which is a farce) is just a manufactured crisis to move us further into a totalitarian system where the state micromanages everything under the guise of protecting the environment.

This does not mean I support the use of oil, because there are far better, less polluting, and much cheaper alternatives you probably haven't heard about. I am just trying to dispell some of the myths that are being put out there that the sky is falling.

Now going back to what I was talking about before, I am completely in favor of REAL energy alternatives. These real energy alternatives DO exist in many forms and have been suppressed. The alternatives they give us are designed to fail and thus keep us dependent on oil. The technology I am talking about -- for instance zero-point energy -- would completely rid us of our dependence on oil FOREVER! The powers that be don't want this, though, so they feed us an endless stream of bullshit about green technologies and sustainable this and that. It has nothing to do with the environment and everything to do with control.

Any mention of "green this" or "green that" and "sustainable this" and "sustainable that" draws connotations in my mind to nazism and fascism, because that is what this push for so-called "sustainability" is all about. The people pushing this nonsense about manmade climate change could not give a damn less about the environment. It's all about controlling and micromanaging everything under the sun, including you.

 

I think Boone Pickens is a business man with investments in wind farms.

I think his ideas completely bet on the wrong horse for which are his own investments. I don't think he provides anything close to a real plan for sustained energy development.

I somewhat agree with Rat here.

 

Solar panels have made dramatic leaps in recent years, as have mirrors (with a dielectric coating they can be upwards of 99.99% reflective)

prior solar panels only were capable of absorbing red and near red light and converting it into something useful, modern, granted, more expensive, solar panels, are managing to run from the red to the near blue, that's a great deal more energy to be had, as to mirrors, some forms of solar depend on mirrors focusing light onto a boiler tower, were these technologies utilized in wide open spaces (say the vast BLM acreage of nevada, 360 days of sun a year) a dent could be made.

as to hydroelectric, tes, there is a limit to what we should use, but the nation is still underutilizing it's waterways, mississippi's flood control has left the delta sadly emaciated, I cannot conceive of a reason a dam/artificial lake arrangement could not aide this problem, and perhaps offer more hurricane protection also

these things are certainly not the answer, wind power isn't the whole answer, natural gas, oil shale, butanol, ethanol, biodiesel's, coal, nuclear, none of these are total answers, not a one has the BTU's required to run this country, much less the world, but each can make a dent, with responsible stewardship, and objective approaches to funding, there are solutions, they just happen to be hard solutions, and the government lacks the will to make it happen without a real collapse of their power at stake.

 

dont think times arent really that tough. gdp is growing, unemployment is only around 5%, profits outside of the housing and financial industries and growing... we're taking a step back right now but i think the pessimism is overblown. if you look back historically we've been through much worse. this is pretty mild, a mental recession.

 

al gore is onto something when he talks about alternative energy i dont agree with him on global warming but its a good idea to diversify our energy sources

 

I agree...

Any one sustainable source that we have now is not the answer... there needs to be a combination of wind, solar, geothermal and more to take a place of oil...

Our ability to harvest energy from these renewable resources such as the wind and water might be very very advanced at this point had we been pouring the same amount of money into the research as we did into drilling, pipelines, finding new ways to used gas and oil...etc. We might even have the technology already but the patents have been bought by the oil companies and car manufacturers...

 

solar & wind energy are both great ideas.. and both should be expanded.

we are the USA.. we only fix things when they break...

and we only fix it enough to get by...and charge a shit load for it

kinda like a plumber.


we just need to be more efficent. i still see dudes driving around in those monster trucks..that probably run about 600 bucks a month in gas.

its stupid...but only because the USA is..

leadership matters.... hopefully in the upcoming 8 years..we will see some sort of change.
__________________

 

:toetap05:

So cork-board floors and geothermal heating is a sustainable plot to... nazism?

Curb-side composting services and an influx of cyclists on the free-way is a micro-managed plot of total world control?

Honestly, you just like being a repugnant infatuated with vaulting rebellion. Informed people are capable of making better choices, hell, they're even capable of making good choices when it comes to the environment.

And so what if some alternative energies fail? At least people are finally standing up to the industrial complex and changing what's out there. Alternatives are better than corporate-monopolized subordination, in case you forgot.

Or perhaps your fervent battle as an insurrectionist has led you to contend concepts like "sustainability" as bankrupted as the same malice incarnate and fatalistic skepticism that abates your own resistance with self-sanguinity.

Doomed to fail? Ah yes, there's that familiar attitude you take pleasure to employ.

Come down and look at me from your plinth of moral rectitude. The air must be very thin up there, dear.

 

I am not referring to people's own efforts to embrace sustainable lifestyles. I am talking about carbon credits and global CO2 taxes and "green" police snooping through people's garbages to make sure they're recycling. I don't think you have a clue about how this all ties in at the higher levels. The people pushing all this stuff from the top have a very different agenda than the average well meaning person who truly wants to help protect the environment. You see, I talk about REAL environment problems like GMO's, cross-species chimera, dioxins in the water, chemical pollution, deforestation, etc. Those are REAL environmental hazards -- not life-sustaining CO2 which plants breathe.

As if there are not monopolies being built around wind farms and other "green" technologies?? Please!! Why do you think all the big oil companies like BP are now coming out in support of "green" technology. Because it's the new thing and they know there's lots of money to be made from it.

 

you mean the same CO2 that naturally only makes up .017% of our atmosphere...that is present in such small amounts that if its presence even doubles, it would throw the balance of every ecosystem on earth? lol.

 

Shit!!i Just Discovered A Commie Under My Bed!!

 

Mmm, I have a p[SIZE=-1]retty good [/SIZE]clue how it ties in at a highe[SIZE=-1]r level. But if you doubt me, I'm open to you[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r views on how it does.

I have issues with the concept of ca[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rbon c[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]redits, myself. I howeve[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r see no p[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]roblem with people talking about how they can pe[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rsonally focus thei[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r effo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rts to [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reduce emissions on that token.

I've neve[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r hea[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rd of people snooping th[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rough othe[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r people's ga[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rbage to make su[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re they a[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]recycling, but I've been to the USA countless times. The[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re is no concise [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]recycling p[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]roblem o[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r public initiative that I have eve[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r witnessed in any majo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r u[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rban city[/SIZE][SIZE=-1].

When you need to find a [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]recycling bin to put you[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r can out in the city, the[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re a[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]ren't any [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]recycling bins anywhe[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re in all of the cities that I've been to in the USA. (Det[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]roit, Buffalo, Albany, New Haven, New Yo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rk, B[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rooklyn, Queens, Philadelphia, Ha[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rtfo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rd, etc.)[/SIZE] It's one of those things that I notice only when I'm in the USA. That and how many people talk on thei[SIZE=-1]r phone without holding it to thei[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r ea[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r.

Anyway, I think climate change, [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reducing ca[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rbon emissions, [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]recycling, [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]resea[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rching and developing alte[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rnative ene[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rgies[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] a[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re[/SIZE][SIZE=-1] [/SIZE]REAL envi[SIZE=-1]ronmental [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]realities and p[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]roblems society is faced along with the things you've mentioned and then some.

The[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re is a lot of money to be made in investing in sustainable technologies. Kindda makes investment wo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rthwhile to go g[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reen [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rathe[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r than impo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rt steel f[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rom China as an example, and look at [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reducing mileage of t[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]ranspo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rted goods in favo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r of local with the soa[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]ring fuel costs.

The capitalist system is a highly consume[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r-[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]responsive system. If going g[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reen is the new thing, then businesses a[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re going g[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reen. They'[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re still only going to make mo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]re [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]money by being highly consume[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r-[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]responsive so I see no p[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]roblem with suppo[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rting g[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]reene[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]r alte[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rnatives in p[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]rinciple.[/SIZE][SIZE=-1][/SIZE]

 

But you're not even on the same page as I am. I am talking about econazi laws aimed at deindustrializing the West so everything can be sent to China (where there are no environmental laws).

I am talking about bogus global carbon taxes implemented by the United Nations, which override national sovereignty.

I am talking about what's outlined in Agenda 21, which calls for wildlife areas off limits to the public, connected by wildlife corridors which are surrounded by so-called "buffer zones" with limited access to the general public. The idea is to basically move everyone into the overcrowded cities and out of the rural areas.

I am talking about people who want to abolish private property and the right to personal vehicle ownership.

I am talking about the overall collectivistic, socialistic agenda which masquerades under the facade of environmentalism, where the state must come in to micromanage everything and pose as our saviors against some non-existent threat.

It's no different than the manufactured al-Qaeda threat, where the state must come in to "protect" the people as more rights and freedoms are relinquished in the name of so-called safety and security.

No, I have nothing wrong with environmental-friendly alternatives. I just think any alternatives they give us are not real alternatives, because I consider the real alternatives (which have been suppressed) to be free energy technologies. Wind and solar would never work out on their own. The technology I speak of is based on the work of people like Nikola Tesla and would completely end our dependence on all oil. Until they stop suppressing these technologies (which they won't), I am going to continue to cry ulterior motive.

The current hype surrounding the environment is just that: hype. Are there legitimate environmental concerns? Of course. However, I don't endorse the lie of climate change being manmade, and I have seen ZERO scientific evidence pointing to C02 having any relation to global warming whatsoever. The environmentalists are busy regurgitating things Al Gore says, which are lies, while ignoring the REAL environmental concerns.

 

Same page? Sure I am.

But I disagree with your view that changes to our environment are NOT manmade. You're the guy who thinks the government and elite use fake jet and commercial planes to spread contrails to alter the weather. You are the guy who just posted a video here that went into detail about how so many planes in the air and increased air traffic is impacting the way clouds form and weather currents.

Is it so hard to believe that the fireflies this year are so small in numbers around here because of the over-use of pesticides/herbicides this season that the farmers are using?

You're swallowing your own lies if you think humans have no impact on the environment and 0 influence to regional weather. I don't think you have the capacity to tell me what real environmental concerns are and distinguish between what aren't, but thank you for trying.

 

Why do you always find a way to conveniently twist people's words to your own benefit? Is it that, or you're just not very good at paying attention? Please point out where I said that humans have no impact on the environment. I never said or even alluded to that. What I said is that I don't believe in the notion of climate change (.ie global warming) being caused by humans, as there is absolutely no proof of this whatsoever. (Tens of thousands of scientists would agree with that, too.) I specifically said there are REAL environmental concerns that can be attributed to human activity, such as chemical pollution, GMO's, deforestation, overfishing, genetic engineering, etc. I can prove there are REAL environmental concerns when my tap water is tested and found to contain prozac, dioxins, and who knows what else. THAT is a problem.

As far as the fireflies, I haven't heard anything about that. However, the bee population is way down, and there could be a number of reasons for this. A big one which I think is overlooked is GMO crops. Could pesticides be killing the fireflies you speak of? Possibly. But why are any more pesticides being used this year than any other year that are causing this to happen?