Mike you are playing politics as you know very well that is not Obamas plan.
You are not dumb enough to believe that ,and you should give others the same courtesy.
McCains cute gimick of passing out tire gauges backfired and ran out of gas:)
It is shame to use fear as a motivater** (shame)**
OK, wise one.
What’s the magical plan that Obama has for energy?
Obama made the stupid tire inflation comment. Shall I post the video?
B.S. on the shame thing. Fear is a great motivator to avoid serious trouble.
Obama’s comprehensive New Energy for America plan will:
ENERGY PLAN OVERVIEW:
Provide Short-term Relief to American Families
• Enact a Windfall Profits Tax to Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families.
• Crack Down on Excessive Energy Speculation.
• Swap Oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to Cut Prices.
Read the full version of Barack Obama’s New Energy for America plan](“http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newenergy_more#relief”)
Wait, I’ll have to get a barf bucket and waders.
As a (former) phyicist who regularly reads the scientific journals, let me state:
Solar, while a start, can no way provide anywhere near the energy that these guys say. MAYBE, if there is a bog break through in the technology, but that is not on the horizion and is definately, not off-the-shelf, as Gore claims.
Wind, while also good, can in no way replace anywhere near the amount of energy that these guys claim.
Why exclude nuclear. No one has ever died as a result of a commercial Nuke plant in the U.S. 3 mile island, where they predicted thousands of deaths, was totally over played and did not cause any problems (other than the clean up). France gets 80% of its energy from Nuclear, Japan is a little less. And don’t buy the BS about the waste storage. That is all about blockage by the Sierra club and the neo-luddites.
We simply cannot completely eliminate petroleum. Don’t believe me?
Well, answer these:
How can one run an airplane on solar or wind?
One word, “Plastics”.
Another word, “Chemicals”.
The most promising solution, clean energy, low construction and operation costs and very inexpensive and virtually inexhaustable fuel, no toxic or radioactive waste products and very little money going into it. Fusion. But, it’s “too nuclear” for the ignorant.
Just my 2 1/2 cents.
How far have we come in fusion energy.?
Is it perfected and ready for use Will?
If not then why po po on solar, wind and other forms of energy as a not complete , but as a comprehensive package that when working all together at the infancy stage will encourage more research to perfect them till we have a clear winner (hopefully).
Remember a roofer can be licensed but still have the wrong idea about how to do things.(refering to flashing of past credentials)
I seem to recall Jimmy Carter having some science education to, for all the good it did.
Bob, solar voltaic and wind power cannot survive without government subsidy.
Just like Ethanol. 
Basic research into the problems of these alternate technologies is fine but subsidizing non viable current technology is pouring money down the drain.
Will we never learn?
Guess you never heard of Pickensplan.com
My plan is to stop selling cars to the Middle East, they can go back to Camels. Stop letting leftwingers from driving to reduce domestic consumption. Stop leftwingers from eating, to reduce greenhouse gases. outlaw the Democratic party from talking,(Hot Air) to reduce Global Warming.
It was in February 1962 we had the first American orbit the earth.
It was in September 1962 that President Kennedy called for a man on the moon in 10 years.
It was July 1969 we landed the first man on the moon. 7 years. 7 frigging years.
We need that same challenge to become energy independent. Big Oil won’t help. They would be shooting themselves in the foot.
You don’t need government to do it all. But they can make sure others will. Cafe standards? Make it 40 mpg for all gas/diesel burning vehicles in 10 years. Required or $25k fine per vehicle manufactured. Make it so expensive they have no choice. Screw the status quo. It needs a big shake up.
Bob,
Solar and wind will never be enough to completely replace coal and oil. Simple energy calculations.
Sure, if we cover 1/2 the US with solar panels and the other 1/2 with windmills, we can do it, but then you have the problems of storage and transmission losses (what happens at night with no sun. Battery technology is getting MUCH better, but no where near where we need it.
As for fusion, it is very close to being perfected, but lacks the funding. Why throw money at something that we know will not work soon enough while starving development on a technology that is just about to bloom.
And why no nuclear. Dresen (local Illinois nuclear plant, and the oldest commercial plant in the U.S.) is close to 60 years old and still going strong. I worked there, as an intern, in 74. Zion worked fine, but was shut down by the bambiologists. Take down all the political obstacles and nukes would work fine.
If you want to believe in pie-in-the-sky rather than existing solutions, that kinda points to an agenda, does it not?
With regards to Pickins: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTY1Njk0MWNkNTk2NGY3OTRmZTIyMWM4YWM0YWM4MmI=
If technology comes along, technologythat works and does not have to subsidised with my tax money (setting an inaccurate price), I am all for it.
BTW: Solar and wind technology have already been around since the 70s (and earlier). If they have not been perfected, or their energy output efficiency raised that much, what will change that?
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
Solar and Wind are viable means to produce electricity, and the more it is developed and used, the more the price will come down.Those combined with Nuclear and Hydroelectric could easily handle all of our needs. I also wish there were more Motorcycles and Bicycles in use. Harley is hurting right now, but the companies that make smaller bikes and Scooters can’t keep up with the demand. The argument by the Tree Huggers, about large windmills killing birds is ridiculous. The Dodo bird has been exinct for quite a while now, and any bird stupid enough to fly into one, needs to go the same way.
Yeah, he is into the green plan alright! Green money!
Well my personal solution is this. My oil company wanted $4600.00 up front for this heating season, since I have a full tank of oil and can burn wood I told them no thanks!!! I’ll take my chances. I am also installing some electric baseboard heat to replace the propane stove I have in on section of my house. I live in a 175 year old farm house and can heat it solely on wood for about $1500.00. So I’m sending a message to my own oil company and hopefully many other people will too.
By the way, I’m with Will on this too, more Nuke plants are needed, this is not the only solution but one of many this country needs to adopt in the future.
Will
Sorry had to work.
At this point you are right that wind alone or solar alone may not be enough.
Nuclear fusion or fission for that matter are not the perfect answer either, unless you are into the high tech idea of shooting spent urainium into space with magnetic rails.
As stated before I think all of these ideas need to be used , investigated and researched , yet for some reason you Republicans all march in lockstep that drilling and Nuke are the only way.
It is like a horror movie .
Ok guys , wear your jammies , get a blank look on your face , start drooling ,walk into the street without bending your knees and repeat after me.
Brains…Brains…oppp I mean drill…dril…drill…we love Shell, we love BP…we love Citco…Brains is what we need .
The trouble is Bob that the drilling and the Nuclear plants should have happened years ago. We would not be in the mess we are in now.
Now go read some history and find out why we didn’t drill and build nuclear plants.
If you want someone to blame, at least find out who is the guilty party.
Chevron Data Shows Industry Lag in Producing New Oil from U.S. Sources
Lower Production Shows Failure of Investment, Not Lack of Oil, Says Watchdog
SANTA MONICA, Calif., Aug. 1 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – Chevron Corp. reaped
another record quarterly profit of** $6 billion dollars, despite producing less**
oil than projected and losing money on its refining of oil into gasoline. The
results illustrate an industry with plenty of resources to produce more oil in
the U.S., but slow to spend the money to develop them, said Consumer Watchdog.
“The most striking thing about Chevron’s report was its executives’ webcast
discussion of its available new oil and its progress, or lack of it, in
producing that oil,” said Judy Dugan, research director of the nonprofit,
nonpartisan Consumer Watchdog. “Its most immediate project is a Nigerian
oilfield expected to ‘turn a handsome profit,’ as one executive acknowledged,
while costlier projects in the Gulf of Mexico merited only vague predictions.”
“These economic choices show the pointlessness of President Bush’s demand that
currently off-limits coastal areas be handed on a platter to oil companies,
while known large discoveries in the Gulf of Mexico go undrilled,” said Dugan.
"The ‘drill now, drill everywhere’ campaign is a hoax on Americans."
Chevron alone has four large areas being developed in the Gulf of Mexico, two
of which – leases named Blind Faith and Tahiti – are projected to produce
oil by the end of 2009. Two others, known as Jack and St. Malo, are years
behind schedule – put off because of cost and the lack of drilling rigs,
according to a recent Bloomberg report. The fields are each likely to produce
at least several hundred millions of barrels of oil.
(See the Bloomberg report here)
“Chevron’s laggard production of U.S.-based oil shows a company intent on
assuring the highest profit from top-quality Nigerian oil, while costlier U.S.
production takes a back seat,” said Dugan. “Later, when Chevron’s new Nigerian
production is hampered by political violence, it’ll be another excuse for
traders to jack up the price of crude oil.”
Chevron, like all the other major oil companies, also continued buying back
its own stock rather than putting the money into producing new oil. The stock
**buybacks in this and the two previous quarters totaled more than $6 billion. **
The company also revealed that its losses in the refining end of its business
were largely due to its own derivative trading in futures markets rather than
actual losses on producing fuel. Under pressure from questioning analysts,
executives sheepishly acknowledged that they were cutting back on such trades.
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS204642+01-Aug-2008+PRN20080801
The big boys do not want to drill in America. They want to continue making record profits and operate the same way they are now.
See what I mean as you can’t stop talking about them as the only possible solution.
Please show me where on this forum you kept mentioning the need to drill before 2008.
You can"t because you never even bothered to think of it till the Republican overlords of Oil told you to.