Thread: Set America Free (Global Security)

You could just ride a bike.

How much deadlier would it be to bomb a nuclear power plant or oil refinery than to attack a wind farm? Why do we insist on using these volatile means of power when there are alternatives?

this is something that really pisses me off, and it is not going to change, but we could easily tap into the sun, i.e. solar energy, utilize more natural gas, as well as wind and water power.

I work in the shipping industry, crude oil tankers in particular.

I dont know if you know.... but liquified natural gas (LNG) is going to slowly replace crude oil in much of the coastal US in the next decade and work out from there. Give it time, its coming. I cant speak for wind poewr/solar power/water power, but natural gas is where it is going to be.

Originally Posted by du510

.... but liquified natural gas (LNG) is going to slowly replace crude oil in much of the coastal US in the next decade and work out from there.

I work in the Photovoltaics Division of one of the largest growing Alternative Energy distributors and know that Natural Gas is just a band-aid on a gaping, gangrenous wound. Is burning something really a good solution?

Changing the way we live our lives, and have since the dawn of time (burning things for heat, light), will not be an overnight thing. One step at a time, we are going in the right direction.

We need to make huge changes now. For one conserving as much chemical fuel as we can for global travel is very important, it takes a lot of fuel to get and keep a 747 in the sky. The environment is another thing, the more we warm the globe the more energy it'll take to stay cool. Thus the more we burn, the hotter it gets, the more we burn exhausting the supply at exponential rates. Look at the mountains of air-conditioners at Costco and Sams Club that quicly turn to a hill in a week. You say you're in shipping du510 then you should know that Matson and Horizon just upped their fuel surcharges and that will definitely trickle down to the consumer. Changing a ship to run on Liquid Natural gas is not a cheap option. So I say conserving as much oil as possible right this minute will save as in the long run even if it does cost alot now to make the change. A billion spent now on Renewables will be a trillion saved in the future when carbon based sources are gone and shifts in large transportation fuels cost everyone.

Implementing a new energy strategy will make a lot of new jobs. New manufacturing positions, research and devolpment, sales, system designers, installers, inspectors, repair technicians etc. All of those jobs would be domestic (if we start now) instead of the many overseas positions drilling for oil and natural case have. If we don't start now most of the Manufacturing, r&d, sales and system design jobs will be in Europe and Japan who are already a few decades ahead of the U.S. as it stands.

Maniclion.. you must be the most pessimistic person on the board.

No matter what this country does, its never good enough.

U should move up here to Arcata in NoCal. Nuthin but Liberals. You'd fit in nicely

Nuclear power if volatile?

More foolish statements from an ignorant man. If we put these industries out of business, how many thousands of jobs will it cost? Do you care? I don't know how many people it takes to operate a windmill.

Your statements that thousands of new jobs will be made are probably erroneous. I'd love to argue those numbers you made up any day.

I'll take good, reliable energy with thousands of well paying jobs over "well wishing philosophy" any day.

Long term all people in the fossil fuels industry will be jobless so it makes sense to start paying some serious attention to alternative sources now.

Anyway, as a diehard Bush supporter what do you care about jobs? Bush has the worst job record since Hoover and seems happy to see jobs disappear oversees while giving job exporters tax incentives. Don't tell me you're a 'Compassionate Conservative".

Originally Posted by Duncans Donuts

Nuclear power is volatile?As potential terrorist targets, yes. Also Chernobyl, 3 mile Island? There have also been numerous and I mean numerous leaks of radioactive coolant.

More foolish statements from an ignorant man. If we put these industries out of business, how many thousands of jobs will it cost? Do you care? I don't know how many people it takes to operate a windmill.
You obviously don't have very much foresight. In 2003 we imported 12,254 or 66.3% of our oil consumption of which 20.3% is from the Middle East. Those jobs to discover, drill, guard, maintain, transport, etc. are mostly to foreign workers and the most profits are reaped by foreign companies. If we start turning toward locally made energy the money stays within our sphere and churns up our economy.

Your statements that thousands of new jobs will be made are probably erroneous. I'd love to argue those numbers you made up any day.
At the pace the U.S is going you are right, instead of stimulating an Alternative Energy Industry now we are losing ground to Germany and Japan from whom we will be importing Fuel Cells, light weight car parts, Inverters for Wind, Solar and Hydro, Wind Generators, Photovoltaics modules, and all of the other main system parts. The only jobs that will be left are the distribution, installation, inspection and repair positions which on their own would be at least a few hundred thousand in a couple decades. If we were to take an aggressive attack on Fossil Fuel independence and encourage R & D, engineering and manufacturing that number would jump to at least 1 million new jobs in a high tech range within our borders keeping that level of wealth at home rather than abroad.

http://www.fact-index.com/l/li/list_...accidents.html Check out this long list of Nuclear Accidents.

.

Originally Posted by maniclion

http://www.fact-index.com/l/li/list_...accidents.html Check out this long list of Nuclear Accidents.

Are you saying this is a reason to not use nuclear energy?