loumeinhart 0 #26 November 3, 2009 QuoteSo we're a ways away, but a great start, don't you think? Yep, most of the GM cars are electric now, especially after Obama gave them all that bailout money!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
loumeinhart 0 #27 November 3, 2009 Quotethey need to get battery technology to give us 200 miles per charge What should that cost? 30 cents? 5 dollars? 25 dollars? You Pick!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zep 0 #28 November 3, 2009 --anything else you can think of? Yep, Nationlisation, take oil out of the greedy private sector and put it in the grubby hands of the government. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #29 November 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteThere are several, we are exploring them which ones? Cars that run on steam or solar panels? I'm exited to know! Tell me! Tell me! Electric. Didn't Obama send a few Billion to electric car development? And someone just posted a thread about nuclear power facilities. I think some interest is in alternate fuels, but mostly electric, that will be the bridge to alt fuels, as they will take longer. And that electricity primarily comes from the burning of coal and natural gas. Not really alternative yet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zep 0 #30 November 3, 2009 They should be doing more research into dark matter. The boffins say their is an awful lot of it about. Gone fishing Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #31 November 3, 2009 Quote They should be doing more research into dark matter. The boffins say their is an awful lot of it about. Right, I have a bunch in the back of my closet.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #32 November 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteSo we're a ways away, but a great start, don't you think? Yep, most of the GM cars are electric now, especially after Obama gave them all that bailout money!!! I wouldn't say most, but a good start and a good value for the bailout $ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #33 November 3, 2009 QuoteQuotethey need to get battery technology to give us 200 miles per charge What should that cost? 30 cents? 5 dollars? 25 dollars? You Pick!! As it is now, 200 miles worth of gas costs about $27 if you get 20MPG, so even if it were higher than you stated, it would still be a good deal. Isee you're trying to be Socratic and poke at it, but it's a great start regardless of what the right says. Indep from OPEC, environmental healing; it's a win/win all around. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #34 November 3, 2009 You really have no clue do you? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #35 November 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThere are several, we are exploring them which ones? Cars that run on steam or solar panels? I'm exited to know! Tell me! Tell me! Electric. Didn't Obama send a few Billion to electric car development? And someone just posted a thread about nuclear power facilities. I think some interest is in alternate fuels, but mostly electric, that will be the bridge to alt fuels, as they will take longer. And that electricity primarily comes from the burning of coal and natural gas. Not really alternative yet. Well it didn't happen in 15 minuites, I say we fire him and go back to petro. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #36 November 3, 2009 Magical electric, great for the environment, produced without any input. The Easter bunny will come to you house and drop off an electric car for you too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tokter 0 #37 November 3, 2009 QuoteMagical electric, great for the environment, produced without any input. A coal burning power plant is probably more efficent and easier to make cleaner burning than thousends of little combustion engines. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 2 #38 November 3, 2009 This is what obama said: "When I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, you know, under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 His plan is for the oil and gas rates to skyrocket forcing you to use companies that are in bed with the government such as the company he travels to in order to sign bills in front of (they manufacture solar panels). Or so you will have to turn to GE. What do you think the Green Job Czar is all about. Cap and trade taxes the carbon emissions of all businesses forcing the prices of oil and gas higher forcing us to find alternatives. Keep in mind these alternatives have been around for a long time but they are not cost effective so people don't use them. Well, he is going to make them cost effective by forcing the prices of oil and gas high. The reality is that gasoline for your car is taxed at an average of 40% total in most states so government is already heavily invovled in the price and profit so who is really greedy here anyways? The oil and gas companies and not GE who is in bed with the government in order to gain a monopoly through government regulation? Why is it that if a business who employees millions makes money they are evil and greedy but when the government makes millions by taxing the businesses and people loose jobs as a result why are the government officials not greedy? When you give the oil companies money you get something in exchange whereas the government takes your money and you get nothing! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #39 November 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteMagical electric, great for the environment, produced without any input. A coal burning power plant is probably more efficent and easier to make cleaner burning than thousends of little combustion engines. In a way that is his point. If you have all these little electric cars, where is the power to charge them going to come from?"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #40 November 3, 2009 Quote Tug of war my ASS he doesn't need a SINGLE FUCKING REPUBLICAN VOTE ?? Do you understand what that means ?? His admin can draw up whatever they dream and vote it into law without a single republican participating. :) In most democratic republics (including but not limted to the US), if a political party, having previously been in power, finds itself roundly voted out of power and into impotence, that's usually its own damned fault. Their post-election complaints about that harsh fact will properly be seen as just so much whining. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #41 November 3, 2009 End oil company subsidies. Funnel the money to clean/efficient car development and mass transit. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 2 #42 November 3, 2009 As for all this cleaning the environment I am all for taking care of the planet but lets look at a couple of things. First according to the numbers that IPCC has produced (many of which have been falsified by actual observations) we would have to completely stop emiting CO2 for 30 years in order to reduce global temperatures by 1 degree! In addition they have finally admitted we have been in a cooling trend for 10 years and it may continue for as long as 20 or 30 years. Also, we never even reached the temps of the roman or midievil warming periods. The observations are actually showing that CO2 may be the cleanest emission as the charged particles we recieve from the sun and the oceans regulate CO2 and reduce the amount in the atmosphere in cycles. Look at some charts over the past few thousand years. Notice how carbon goes down! Thats why! In addition, who is the real polluter: business or government? Our government, at the federal, state, and local levels, is the single greatest polluter in the land. In addition, our government doesn't even clean up its own garbage! In 1988, for example, the EPA demanded that the Departments of Energy and Defense clean up 17 of their weapons plants which were leaking radioactive and toxic chemicals -- enough contamination to cost $100 billion in clean-up costs over 50 years! The EPA was simply ignored. No bureaucrats went to jail or were sued for damages. In fact, the amount it would cost to clean up the governments polution would cost more than cleaning up all the polution of all businesses in the US combined! So if we really want to clean up things then we need to get the government out not in! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #43 November 3, 2009 Quote You really have no clue do you? So you have nothing to say, yet feel compelled to reply? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucky... 0 #44 November 3, 2009 QuoteMagical electric, great for the environment, produced without any input. The Easter bunny will come to you house and drop off an electric car for you too. I know, you're a GWB oil lover, but it is really the devil. Of course elect emits polution, just that it's less caustic as compared to oil The real solution is toreduce the number of people, but politicians can't run under that agenda, even tho some probably want to. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnnyD 0 #45 November 3, 2009 QuoteEnd oil company subsidies. Funnel the money to clean/efficient car development and mass transit. That's being proposed, although as part of deficit reduction not development. http://www.api.org/Newsroom/upload/R40715_Report_on_Oil_Industry_Taxes_2009_07_21.pdf This will be interesting to keep an eye on. If these changes are included in the budget, I think it will seriously decrease production in America. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rickjump1 0 #46 November 3, 2009 How about a thank you card from the Saudis. Didn't he get some kind of student loan from them?Do your part for global warming: ban beans and hold all popcorn farts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #47 November 3, 2009 QuoteHow about a thank you card from the Saudis. Didn't he get some kind of student loan from them? There have been many attempts to smear Obama by alleging "questionable sources" of funding for his education. They're bullshit, of course; so thanks for your contribution. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/money.asp Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #48 November 3, 2009 >The Easter bunny will come to you house and drop off an electric car for you too. The Easter bunny dropped off a solar power system and an electric bike a while back at my house. Zero emissions, zero cost for fuel. Too bad there are people who believe that that's some sort of impossible magic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #49 November 3, 2009 >(many of which have been falsified by actual observations) No, they haven't. >we would have to completely stop emiting CO2 for 30 years in order to >reduce global temperatures by 1 degree! Right. Instead, we should just level off our emissions, to keep changes down to a minimum. >The observations are actually showing that CO2 may be the cleanest >emission as the charged particles we recieve from the sun and the oceans >regulate CO2 and reduce the amount in the atmosphere in cycles. I think you may have misheard something; the science in there makes zero sense. > Look at some charts over the past few thousand years. Notice how carbon >goes down! Thats why! Chart attached. Perhaps you were looking at it backwards. >So if we really want to clean up things then we need to get the government out not in! Google Donora, PA. A good example of "keeping government out." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #50 November 3, 2009 > If these changes are included in the budget, I think it will seriously decrease >production in America. Good! That will save our resources for when we really need them - AND drive gas prices up, which is the only way any alternative fuel/technology will take off. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
