I am all for some alternative energy source that will meet all of our needs. Currently the technology to not use oil just does not exist in a sufficient supply. In the meantime we should produce what we need. Somehow this view will be portrayed as extreme on this forum.
I am all for some alternative energy source that will meet all of our needs. Currently the technology to not use oil just does not exist in a sufficient supply. In the meantime we should produce what we need. Somehow this view will be portrayed as extreme on this forum.
No, we do need oil, though increasing and opening up protected lands won't help much as we wouldn't get that oil. All of the oil goes into the "fund" or the "world" supply. Right now we are drilling more than ever before just in the US. There is also a surplus of oil right now. We don't need to destroy our country over oil. The technology is already there to replace oil and gas, though it needs to be built and that is the problem. If the money spent on all the dangerous forms of energy was spent on safe/clean energy we would get more for less. Seems that what ever new directions we need to take we keep going backwards, and that isn't just in the fuel we consume.
Pray tell? What is this centuries' fuel? And please tell me you rode a bicycle to work today. I was thinking about the number of batteries that one would need to get a jumbo jet off the ground. Answer. There aren't enough. And exactly how is oil, a natural product, killing people? And you are wrong about supply. If we wanted we could keep our own oil. And us, not OPEC, can control the price. Why the paranoia over oil? Your fears are unfounded. Did you know that windmills kill birds?
I am all for some alternative energy source that will meet all of our needs. Currently the technology to not use oil just does not exist in a sufficient supply. In the meantime we should produce what we need. Somehow this view will be portrayed as extreme on this forum.
No, we do need oil, though increasing and opening up protected lands won't help much as we wouldn't get that oil. All of the oil goes into the "fund" or the "world" supply. Right now we are drilling more than ever before just in the US. There is also a surplus of oil right now. We don't need to destroy our country over oil. The technology is already there to replace oil and gas, though it needs to be built and that is the problem. If the money spent on all the dangerous forms of energy was spent on safe/clean energy we would get more for less. Seems that what ever new directions we need to take we keep going backwards, and that isn't just in the fuel we consume.
2 misconception. We are not drilling more than ever. Yes, it is true that on private lands we are, but all federal lands are under a moratorium. No, there is not a surplus of oil. We have reserves, which are meant for emergencies, but which are taped into by this administration to lower the price of gasoline, but world supplies of oil are down. Why do you refer to oil as dangerous? Because its flammable. Hello? Energy? Yes we need to move forward in technologies, but you don't just shut everything down and then start looking. Short sighted.
nope, been to the gulf and saw all the freaking oil around though. also went up to Alaska and saw that mess.
I'm a Marine Biologist of 30 years, working in South Louisiana. I'm a court qualified expert in oysters. You don't want to argue with me as to the oil spill. I would tell you that the amount spilled was a lie. The amount of surface damage that they say it affected is a lie. And if you came down today, you would be hard pressed to find any oil or effects of it. We had more self-righteous mini-government agents and lawyers getting lost in our wetlands than there were instances of oil showing on the surface. Believe me when I say that nature has a way of dealing with its' own natural products. I can't speak for the government dispersants that they were dropping by the ton in the middle of the night. They never said what it was.
I'm all for alternative energy but there is one problem, there is no golden alternative. Nat Gas is just oil with less uses and pollution. Solar can't work at night or in very cloudy conditions and Solar power can not be stored at large scale. Geothermal is still in the early phases and can only work along the West Coast and the Yellowstone area. Wind doesn't work when it isn't windy. Hydroelectric works, but not all place have access to the necessary amount of water. Fission works fine and should be more readily available, except the waste needs to be dressed. Fusion is still under works on how to harness it. And I think it's called Biomass which is things like ethanol. The problem with biomass is the cost is high, inefficient, and takes time. Tbh Oil, Nat. Gas, and Coal are all the easiest and most efficient ways atm
I'm all for alternative energy but there is one problem, there is no golden alternative. Nat Gas is just oil with less uses and pollution. Solar can't work at night or in very cloudy conditions and Solar power can not be stored at large scale. Geothermal is still in the early phases and can only work along the West Coast and the Yellowstone area. Wind doesn't work when it isn't windy. Hydroelectric works, but not all place have access to the necessary amount of water. Fission works fine and should be more readily available, except the waste needs to be dressed. Fusion is still under works on how to harness it. And I think it's called Biomass which is things like ethanol. The problem with biomass is the cost is high, inefficient, and takes time. Tbh Oil, Nat. Gas, and Coal are all the easiest and most efficient ways atm
Biofuel...algae... We could fuel the diesel needs of the us with very little effort and export with ease. Hell...there's enough oil in the US we don't need to import it. The problem is the politics, not the fuel. The fuel and technology are there.
Should multinational oil companies headquartered in the US get subsidies and tax breaks from the American people so that these most profitable companies in the world can continue to make even higher profits, provided to a very large extent by the consumers living in the United States?
Should multinational oil companies headquartered in the US get subsidies and tax breaks from the American people so that these most profitable companies in the world can continue to make even higher profits, provided to a very large extent by the consumers living in the United States?
Algae has been approved as the most viable form of biofuel...not corn. There is no environmental impact from growing algae In a greenhouse...much different then corn. We could easily produce a ridiculous amount of fuel with greenhouses in any part of America and fuel the entire country. The larger vehicles and machinery that run or country's economy run on diesel. Producing it ourselves with a cleaner source isnt an answer?
Comments