We all Know the Truth, Right?

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Check out my Blog post for this one. :-5

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/blog.php?u=11585

And check this out as well Promises Promises

[YZGI]

QUINNSCOMMENTARY;1040661 wrote: Check out my Blog post for this one. :-5



http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/blog.php?u=11585
I agree that very little will be accomplished. The only way I figure we can get out of this good ole boy predicament is to vote out all incumbents for the foreseeable future and get some new blood into the fold. Hopefully some of the new ones voted in will not become disenfranchised by the career politicians and try to get back to the government working for the people instead of working for itself at the peoples expense.

[Galbally]

Energy independence is a simple equation, give up burning crude oil and eventually natural gas from oil fields for energy, and stop wasting enormous amounts of energy on....well on wastage, its as simple as that. Europe has an even greater geopolitical challenge as we have so little oil and gas ourselves so we have to get our act together very quickly, whereas at least the US has a lot of natural gas, these so-called new reserves of oil that are available are highly questionable in terms of being a replacement for foreign imported oil. Though in the short term more oil and gas production at home would help to at least stimulate the economy as long ass production costs are so high its pointless. I would suggest that in the medium term Nuclear power is about the best answer we have. Long term, who knows, but if there is a lot of money involved (which there is) some bright kid will work out something useful, but it will take time. In any case, this is a technological problem, and requires a technological/engineering solution, not a load of gobbledigook moral or political philosophy from either right or left.

At least in Europe the climate problems are being accepted as being real (though they are still procrastinating doing much about it), while in America the problem is one of almost total denial, and in trying to explain that this isn't a "liberal conspiracy" (yawn). Its becoming a tiresome argument, as it seems impossible to have rational argumnents based on evidence anymore (as it seems to me) that rationality has become totally debased by the entry of religious fundamentalism into mainstream public life in the States (and its now constant use of solipisms and tautologies to justify stupid policies), but the penny will drop eventually, and energy security is making people pay more attention.

Getting away from fossil fuels is an imperative, because if we don't, we are going to destroy the climate and ourselves in about 50 years, again thats not a moral thing, its just physics and chemistry, and anyone who says different frankly doesn't know what they are talking about. You may not like to hear that as it offends your sensitivities about your world-view, or your ideas about individual freedom (how escapes me, but there you go). Well, you should deal with it because its the reality, whether the President, the Prime Minister, or Exxon believes it or not. So the hard part is that people will have to get used to not using oil in the next couple of decades, the good thing is they won't notice, the only difference will be that cars will be quieter and that they will have to be more energy concious and stop wasting so much of it, which is not that difficult.

[QUINNSCOMMENTARY]

Galbally;1041065 wrote: Energy independence is a simple equation, give up burning crude oil and eventually natural gas from oil fields for energy, and stop wasting enormous amounts of energy on....well on wastage, its as simple as that. Europe has an even greater geopolitical challenge as we have so little oil and gas ourselves so we have to get our act together very quickly, whereas at least the US has a lot of natural gas, these so-called new reserves of oil that are available are highly questionable in terms of being a replacement for foreign imported oil. Though in the short term more oil and gas production at home would help to at least stimulate the economy as long ass production costs are so high its pointless. I would suggest that in the medium term Nuclear power is about the best answer we have. Long term, who knows, but if there is a lot of money involved (which there is) some bright kid will work out something useful, but it will take time. In any case, this is a technological problem, and requires a technological/engineering solution, not a load of gobbledygook moral or political philosophy from either right or left.

At least in Europe the climate problems are being accepted as being real (though they are still procrastinating doing much about it), while in America the problem is one of almost total denial, and in trying to explain that this isn't a "liberal conspiracy" (yawn). Its becoming a tiresome argument, as it seems impossible to have rational argumnents based on evidence anymore (as it seems to me) that rationality has become totally debased by the entry of religious fundamentalism into mainstream public life in the States (and its now constant use of solipisms and tautologies to justify stupid policies), but the penny will drop eventually, and energy security is making people pay more attention.

Getting away from fossil fuels is an imperative, because if we don't, we are going to destroy the climate and ourselves in about 50 years, again thats not a moral thing, its just physics and chemistry, and anyone who says different frankly doesn't know what they are talking about. You may not like to hear that as it offends your sensitivities about your world-view, or your ideas about individual freedom (how escapes me, but there you go). Well, you should deal with it because its the reality, whether the President, the Prime Minister, or Exxon believes it or not. So the hard part is that people will have to get used to not using oil in the next couple of decades, the good thing is they won't notice, the only difference will be that cars will be quieter and that they will have to be more energy concious and stop wasting so much of it, which is not that difficult.


While I certainly agree we need alternative energy sources, the reality is years away. It takes ten years to build a nuclear generating station and we still have not solved the problem of radioactive waste. Here in the states the government has been collecting hundreds of millions of dollars from nuclear plant operators in anticipation of placing the stuff in what is known as Yucca Mountain, after more than ten years of haggling nothing has yet happened and the waste is still stored on the plant sites around the country. Wind power sounds good, but the truth you don't hear about is that our transmission grid can't handle it and there is no way of getting the electricity to the customers unless they are right next to the wind turbines. Politicians and environmentalists are good at glib answers but when it comes right down to it, the old NIMBY (not in my back yard) rules. :-6

[Oscar Namechange]

I agree with Quinn. While we like to think that there is an alternative fuel out there, the reality is miles away. We both depend on other countrie's for crude. While religion is blamed for a lot of the troubles in the middle East, it is down to an oil war and nothing else.