Post #167,300
8/3/04 3:09:03 PM
|
It's about time...
From the article: To secure our full independence and freedom, we must free America from its dangerous dependence on Mideast oil. By tapping American ingenuity, we can achieve that goal while growing our economy and protecting our environment. Kerry-Edwards will create a new energy and conservation trust fund to accelerate the development of innovative technologies, such as more efficient cars and trucks, the development of biofuels, and creating clean, secure, hydrogen-based energy. Kerry-Edwards will also expand the supply of natural gas, assure 20% of electricity comes from renewable sources by 2020, and make clean coal part of our energy solution. I know that this is most likely political bluster, but I have often wondered why a national gasoline tax just for this purpose (fund the "trust fund") was never implemented/thought of. The cynical part of me wants to blame big oil, lobbyist, etc. but I would be willing to support (yes, even vote for) anyone who is really willing to take this on. And I would expand the independence notion to say that America will regain the morale high ground by refusing to do business with countries who do not follow basic standards of human rights, etc. AND NOT DO BUSINESS with countries whose laws allow the subjugation of women or legal systems that include irreparable punishments for property crimes (cutting off hands, etc.). If we really want to be "respected" by the international community (notice that I'm not assuming that we have "ever" been respected - feared after Nagasaki/Hiroshima - by the world community), we must walk the walk as well as talk the talk. We must be able to put our morales over our self interests. A tall order for a country, but I'm game. Are you? I am willing to do some financial suffering in order that my children will not have to fight bottom-line wars for corps America and despotic nations. Let American business people who want a presence in these countries fight by themselves. There's no need for my kids to die for these ass clown's greed. And better still, let's make the issue a moot point by eliminating our need to do business with kingdoms of this ilk. Let's "we the people" bring this issue to the forefront of this election. I mean, THEY (Kerry/Edwards) started it, right? Then, let's we the people insist that they keep their word. Interesting notion there. Can we impeach elected officials for breach of contract? Just a few thoughts,
Danno
|
Post #167,367
8/3/04 7:27:51 PM
|
Ob nit re implications
Subbing morale for moral, in some eyes is a Truth; oft we Muricans are ever so willing to choose the latter - to give the solipsistic appearance$ of the former. And to make $$ - via any means possible. Then dissemble most sanctimoniously.
But I doubt that this sub was other than a mondegreenish sorta thang..
As to the substance - Hey! *ANY* sign of a Murican Pol akshully taking steps to implement a Principle .. would be revolutionary. [It happens. Rarely, of course]
Thing is, you don't ever get to find out If You Don't Give Him [and soon, I hope: Her] A Chance - for all good reasons of despising the shenanigans of immediate predecessor and coterie of fawning yes-men.
(whether or not a given 'He' mouthed his campaign-BS cuthlessly - -
Unifier not a divider;
No Nation building;
Ed-ja-Kayshun ...
cha cha cha)
On this particular topic though, and in the End:
Physics Rulez.
Hydrogen is a no-winner overall - production (via fossil-fuels for a very long time), storage, conversion -- usage by a vast dim-witted majority of folk who still manage to kill selves with just gas mains and via wearing no seat belts and.. and..
You Can't Just 'Move-Energy-Around' and call that: Progress.
*HABITS* of generations of inculcated shibboleths that amount to,
Waste-is-Good-for-Bizness Sellin-the-Stuff-You Waste --
This mindset won't erase any quicker than will,
War Is Good [for] Bizness; Invest Your Son [now Daughter, too]
.. by inference, interrupt seriously, the Religo-based millennia of Warz.
Somewhere along the line, we appear to need to Grow Up else Blow Up.
And THAT will be HARD. Much less than 50-50 on that one IMho.
Hope is On the Way
(whatever Physics sez)
er, cha cha cha
|
Post #167,387
8/3/04 9:30:03 PM
|
What's old is new again.
Remember 1973? [link|http://ma.mbe.doe.gov/me70/history/1971-1980.htm|DOE]: October 6, 1973
The Yom Kippur War breaks out in the Middle East. October 17, 1973, the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries declares an oil embargo, sparking the first "energy crisis."
November 7, 1973
President Nixon launches Project Independence, with the goal of achieving energy self-sufficiency by 1980. Recalling the Manhattan Project, Nixon declares that American science, technology, and industry can free the United States from dependence on foreign oil. Kerry's energy plan concludes with: Given that sixty-five percent of the world\ufffds oil reserves are in the Middle East, America will never be able to drill our way to energy independence. But if we have the will and the imagination to declare our commitment to energy independence today, we can achieve it tomorrow. We can create jobs and build a stronger country. We can once again make America the energy and transportation capital of the world, and make America the world\ufffds best steward of the environment we all share. (Emphasis added.) US oil production is dropping, and even with drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska\ufffds National Petroleum Reserve (which he supports instead of ANWAR), it's not likely that these reserves will make up for declines elsewhere. He recognizes this, yet I think he also recognizes that his other proposals will not make us "An Energy Independent America" (as he titles that chapter of his plan). It's not a matter of will, it's a matter of deciding as a matter of US policy that we're willing to invest the hundreds of billions of dollars that would be required to achieve his stated goal: We believe a strong America must no longer rely on the cooperation of regimes that may not share our values, and we are not willing to risk a future in which our young men and women might have to risk their lives to protect Mideast oil supplies. He's not making serious proposals to do that. The US could probably acheive his stated goal (being independent of ME oil) in 20 years, but not by the method he suggests. I think it would take: 1) A massive investment in nuclear fission power to generate enough electricity to liberate hydrogen from water and power the plants to compress and liquify it. Hydro, solar, and wind won't be able to supply the power needed to move to a hydrogen economy for transportation, I don't think (the power density isn't there). (Biomass, etc., is pure pandering to the farmers and ADM, IMO.) 2) Substantial increases in taxes on cars and trucks (e.g. a carbon tax) to encourage people and businesses to reduce their oil consumption. Substantial investment in oil-free polymers to replace the various types of plastics we are so dependent upon. 3) Substantial investment in construction of increased natural gas or hydrogen pipelines to deliver the fuel to tank farms that would supply service stations, etc. 4) Lots of jawboning of other industrial countries to convert their manufacturing processes to reduce their oil needs. (If China is still dependent on oil, and they supply critical equipment that the US needs, then the US mainland being independent of ME oil doesn't mean the US economy is protected. As the world gets more interconnected, the problem will get more difficult.) Etc. It's just pablum from Kerry, IMO. If he proposes substantial tax increases necessary to make his plan a reality, then I'll think he's serious. Note that I don't think Bush is serious about these issues either.... Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #167,396
8/3/04 9:50:59 PM
|
There are other routes to that end
Like [link|http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html|biodiesel]. Though there seems to be some disagreement on feasibility. While that article is optimistic [link|http://www.fuelandfiber.com/Athena/biodiesel_from_algae_es.pdf|this] claims that prices would have to be 2-3 times the current level for biodiesel to be feasible. (But I'd bet that if biodiesel came into wide use, we'd figure out ways to make it cheaper to produce.)
Cheers,
Ben
To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act
- [link|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20|Nebraska Supreme Court]
|
Post #167,401
8/3/04 9:59:35 PM
|
There is also (methyl and ethyl) alcohol.
[link|http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/ert/activitybook/fs-alcohol.html|link]: Methanol and Ethanol are two types of alcohol fuels used in cars. Ethanol can be produced from a variety of renewable resources, most commonly corn and sugarcane. Methanol can be made from renewable resources also, but today, methanol is primarily made from natural gas. Alex
"If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said." -- Alan Greenspan, Federal Reserve chairman
|
Post #167,410
8/3/04 11:56:12 PM
8/3/04 11:58:28 PM
|
We discussed some of these a while ago.
[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=159106|#159106].
zIWeThey is a maze of twisty passages, all alike. :-)
Don't get me wrong, there are many things the US, and others, can do to lessen our dependence on ME oil. But as long as the industrial world runs on petroleum, the ME is going to be a vital region. Kerry's [link|http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=bombast|bombast] about "energy independence" won't change that.
[edit: modified the WeeCode for bombast to get rid of the quotes]
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #167,443
8/4/04 10:59:41 AM
|
It's all about solar orbital microwave power sats.
WANTED: Precognitive Telepath for adventuring Partnership. You know where to apply.
|
Post #167,455
8/4/04 12:24:04 PM
|
And who wants to be by the Earth station?
"Whoops, the aim was off a little bit. Walt's Boneless Chicken Ranch just got cooked." There are a few small problems with some of the proposals for things like this. E.g. [link|http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumerinfo/factsheets/l123.html|here]: Each SPSS would have been massive, measuring 6.5 miles (10.5 kilometers [km]) long and 3.3 miles (5.3 km) wide, or 21 square miles (55.7 square kilometers) in area. The surface of each satellite would have been covered with 400 million solar cells.
The transmitting antenna on the satellite(s) would have been about \ufffd mile in diameter (1 km) and the receiving antennae on the earth's surface would have been about 6 miles (10 km) in diameter. Massive structures such as this would have been a significant engineering challenge.
Because of their size, the satellites would have been constructed in space. The plan envisioned sending small segments of the satellites into space using the Space Shuttle. The materials would have been stored at work stations in low earth orbit, and then towed to the assembly point by a purpose-built "space tug" (such as operating the space shuttle).
Cost was the major obstacle to development of the SPSS. When the NASA-DOE report was completed in 1979, the estimated cost for building a prototype was $74 billion. Construction of an SPSS system would have taken about 30 years to complete. At the time, the United States did not appropriate funds to begin construction. Other countries, such as Japan, are currently exploring the concept of solar power stations in space. TANSTAAFL. Unless you live near Walt's when it happens. :-) Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #167,456
8/4/04 12:53:48 PM
|
Death valley.
Not much there to get cooked already.
Yeah, there are some issues. Hell, we might get better just with a whole set of mirrors beaming heat energy, or maybe lasers heating water, etc.? This is just a couple seconds of thought into the subject - I still think directly from the sun is where ultimately we will aggregate most of our energy from in the long run.
WANTED: Precognitive Telepath for adventuring Partnership. You know where to apply.
|
Post #167,418
8/4/04 1:31:31 AM
|
Early 1974: A Tale of Attention Spans
Ashton purchases a pristine (28K miles) '70 Buick Riviera from an author friend (worried.. for his writing 'backpacking books' - at the Excess, already ;-) for $1200 ~ midway between Audi dealer's trade-in and some other metric.
Ashton declares (and means) .. Well, C - what I *hope* is: by 1975 I can only park this and periodically.. run the AC for a cool-off on the rare August day in Bay Area.. .. finally, use it for a greenhouse with-leather-seats -- y'know?
Turned out to be an eye-opener for moi; this 5000# sucker actually Handled; stops, corners like ary old GranTurismo. IF.. 10-13 mpg is No Big deal. (Down to ~7.2 mpg on one tankfull, climbing the Berkeley Hills regularly.)
I figured.. WTF - Swan Song; maybe I can flog it for 600 in a year or two.
Naah - this Be Murica. ~'75 or 6 I advertised the sucker; gas was sorta back. People in Tears [no lie] when I told them I had sold it to first caller at 2550 (IIRC), having spent 300 for new tires and nothing else. Except gas.
All we learn from history is that never do we learn from history.
-- some recent wag.
1-2 year? attention span back then.
Now -??- 3 weeks Max?
|
Post #167,425
8/4/04 8:41:05 AM
|
See it here:
[link|http://www.caldreamcars.net/416418.html|1970 Riviera] - it's only $12k. :-)
I think the Riviera reached its zenith with the 1971-1973 [link|http://www.cardomain.com/member_pages/show_image.pl?fg=000000&bg=FFFFFF&migration=1&image=http://memimage.cardomain.com/member_images/7/web/403000-403999/403139_7_full.jpg|"boat-tailed"] models. Supposedly the rear window cost $1200 to manufacture. With its low compression 455 CID motor, one would be lucky to get 8 mpg out of that yacht.
Cheers,
Scott.
|
Post #167,394
8/3/04 9:48:10 PM
|
minor nit
who is the largest supplyer of natchrul gas and wind in the US. BP (no not the guy in philly) dont you watch the Teevee?
thanx.
bill
"delayed incessantly by people whose prevalent qualification was an excess of free-time" Philip Atkinson
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
