ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
ANWAR is a go!
- Thread starter lmurden
- Start date
- Status
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2004
- Messages
- 2,547
This touch subject is actually part of a much larger debate.
I maintain that the US and the World do not have an energy shortage. They have a shortage of common sense on energy use and resorces.
Many myths aboud. Conservation will save us - and why dosn''t business conserve. The fact is that almost all business conserved and converted to energy efficient processes 10 - 20 years ago. In many cases the same products are being made with 1/3 of the energy of 20 years ago. It really pays for most businesses to install high efficiency lighting and motors for anything that will be on a lot - and the business have done so.
Funny thing about people: 40 years ago in the US the average new house was built with a 60 amp electric service - which often included an electric stove and may have included an electric water heater (natural gas service to much of the US did not exist). Now the average new home has a 200 amp electric service, natural gas hot water, and may have a natural gas stove. The larger homes being built now might even have a 400 amp electric service.
This is for larger TV''s, waterbeds, computers, etc, etc, etc.
The average person in the US uses far more gasoline/diesel than they did 40 years ago as well (I do not have the numbers handy).
People talk about conservation all the time - then almost always get things that use more energy than before....
Of couse there is one thing that would really change things in the US, Europe, and some other parts of the world that were wired for electricity long ago... Within the US fully 50% (yes 1/2) of all electricity generated is lost through transmission and distribution systme inefficiencies.
There will always be some line losses (that is the nature of the transmission/distribution business) - but it does not have to be anywhere near 50% (10 - 15% line losses is achievable with off the shelf technology - and are commonly constructed wherever new sytems are built).
Most of these losses are in the local distribution system.
The US, and certain other parts of the world, could save massive amounts of fuel and reduce the number of power plants by rebuilding their transmission and distribuiton systems to modern higher voltages. Many of the larges cities in the US operate at 2300 V, or 4160 V distribuition system voltage (this is the voltage on the power lines that run down the street, it is reduced in the US to 120/240 by a smaller transformer and run to individual houses). Newer communities operate above 20,000 V. A 25,000V distribution system has about 1/10 the energy losses of a 2300 V system.
Transmission systems could be improved as well (transmission runs between power plants and cities). Even the smallest transimision lines should be rebuilt at least at 115 KV, and most of it should be rebuilt to 345KV or higher (the major lines are at 345 KV or higher - but a lot of lessor lines are at lower voltages).
The only problem - is that it cost a lot of money (and I do mean A LOT of money) to rebuild a distribution system, and most utility boards do not want to upset the customers by increasing the rates to pay for the rebuild. Hence, at least 35% of all electicity generated goes to waste that did not need to be. Because people don''t see it, they can''t make a good decission on it. It''s just part of your electric bill. Oh, and similar things happen with natural gas distribution - there is a huge cost of transmitting it as well...
If we actually worked to become energy efficient, and then focues on the true cost and environmental issues of the different power generation options and energy distribution systems (do you have any idea how chemically destructive the production of solar cells are....).
There are no perfect power generation technologies. They all have their problems -every one of them. They all have envronmental, health, and industrial safety issues.
The real problems are that most people get focused on a problem - or a percieved problem - with one technology and ignore the problems of the other technologies.
What is needed are full discussions about the real problems of each technology - both short term and long term.
Do you have any idea how dirty coal really is... and how many generations its waste will cause problems (but congress has made coal ash a non- hazardous waste by definition...). I worked for many years in Coal fired plants... I know...
Do you understand the problems with oil and natural gas (you only see the refined end product at your house...). Ever spend time at a refinery....
Do you understand that when you fly off to vacation that you probably get a higher radiation dose from your single trip than the average Nuclear Plant workergets in a year in the US. Aircrew get far more radiation dose for many more years than the most exposed nuclear power plant worker ever gets (and no one is claiming that they have any long term radiation issues). Please note that I am not claiming that there is not an unresolved issue in the US with spent fuel. The US has, in my opionion, taken the stupidest approach to the problem - for self created political reasons. Most other countries in the world reprocess the fuel and stuff the worst gunk back into the reactors where it is burned up. The remaining stuff will decay in a much more reasonable period of time.
The medical profession throws radiation arround like nothing (X-rays, radiation tracer materials for testing, to radiation treatments). Because it is nominally serving a good purpose people never ask or care about how much dose they are getting (I find it amazing that most x-ray technitions cannot even tell you how much dose they are administering with that x-ray. At work I have to go through hours of training and briefings, with many manhours of work to reduce to the maximum exposure, just to get a small fraction of the dose that a common medical x-ray gives a patient. Note that I currently work in a Nuclear Power Plant).
Heck, the average coal fired power plant spits out 100 times the annual radiation emmisions from a nuclear plant - each day it operates (Oil and gas are better than that, but not perfect either). Yet we get people claiming that there are radiation problems with people downwind of nuclear plants - but no one has ever found such problemd downwind of fossil plants...
I am not saying that we should build Nuclear plants. or Coal Plants, or Natural Gas plants, or Solar plants, or Windmills, or any technology. Or that we should be generating hydrogen as our next fuel source. They all have their plusses and minuses (and perhaps I understand some of the plusses and minuses better than many).
I think an honest discussion of all of the plusses and minuses for all the energy technologies and conservation technologies would be very enlightening for the american and world people - only then can we really decide if drilling for oil in the ANWR makes sense or not at this time. Perhaps a law limiting a house to a 100 amp service might be a good thing (or even 60 amps).
I will say that we need to be doing something as most of the generation capacity in the US was built more than 30 years ago - with a design life of 40 years. Now much of it can be rehabed and kept going for another 10 or so years. But there is a limit to what is economical... I have worked in plants where equipment and systems were 60 years old (actually one plant had some piping over 100 years old...). I have a lot of appreaciation on what kinds of problems such equipment and systems have.
The fact of the matter is that in the nex 10 to 20 years the US is going to have to build a lot of power plants to replace the existing old ones... What kind are we going to build, or what mix of technologies? I think that is a very valid question - and I sure wish the American people would stop harping the old myths or the latest politically poplular theme and actually dig beyond the surface of the debates.
Perry
I maintain that the US and the World do not have an energy shortage. They have a shortage of common sense on energy use and resorces.
Many myths aboud. Conservation will save us - and why dosn''t business conserve. The fact is that almost all business conserved and converted to energy efficient processes 10 - 20 years ago. In many cases the same products are being made with 1/3 of the energy of 20 years ago. It really pays for most businesses to install high efficiency lighting and motors for anything that will be on a lot - and the business have done so.
Funny thing about people: 40 years ago in the US the average new house was built with a 60 amp electric service - which often included an electric stove and may have included an electric water heater (natural gas service to much of the US did not exist). Now the average new home has a 200 amp electric service, natural gas hot water, and may have a natural gas stove. The larger homes being built now might even have a 400 amp electric service.
This is for larger TV''s, waterbeds, computers, etc, etc, etc.
The average person in the US uses far more gasoline/diesel than they did 40 years ago as well (I do not have the numbers handy).
People talk about conservation all the time - then almost always get things that use more energy than before....
Of couse there is one thing that would really change things in the US, Europe, and some other parts of the world that were wired for electricity long ago... Within the US fully 50% (yes 1/2) of all electricity generated is lost through transmission and distribution systme inefficiencies.
There will always be some line losses (that is the nature of the transmission/distribution business) - but it does not have to be anywhere near 50% (10 - 15% line losses is achievable with off the shelf technology - and are commonly constructed wherever new sytems are built).
Most of these losses are in the local distribution system.
The US, and certain other parts of the world, could save massive amounts of fuel and reduce the number of power plants by rebuilding their transmission and distribuiton systems to modern higher voltages. Many of the larges cities in the US operate at 2300 V, or 4160 V distribuition system voltage (this is the voltage on the power lines that run down the street, it is reduced in the US to 120/240 by a smaller transformer and run to individual houses). Newer communities operate above 20,000 V. A 25,000V distribution system has about 1/10 the energy losses of a 2300 V system.
Transmission systems could be improved as well (transmission runs between power plants and cities). Even the smallest transimision lines should be rebuilt at least at 115 KV, and most of it should be rebuilt to 345KV or higher (the major lines are at 345 KV or higher - but a lot of lessor lines are at lower voltages).
The only problem - is that it cost a lot of money (and I do mean A LOT of money) to rebuild a distribution system, and most utility boards do not want to upset the customers by increasing the rates to pay for the rebuild. Hence, at least 35% of all electicity generated goes to waste that did not need to be. Because people don''t see it, they can''t make a good decission on it. It''s just part of your electric bill. Oh, and similar things happen with natural gas distribution - there is a huge cost of transmitting it as well...
If we actually worked to become energy efficient, and then focues on the true cost and environmental issues of the different power generation options and energy distribution systems (do you have any idea how chemically destructive the production of solar cells are....).
There are no perfect power generation technologies. They all have their problems -every one of them. They all have envronmental, health, and industrial safety issues.
The real problems are that most people get focused on a problem - or a percieved problem - with one technology and ignore the problems of the other technologies.
What is needed are full discussions about the real problems of each technology - both short term and long term.
Do you have any idea how dirty coal really is... and how many generations its waste will cause problems (but congress has made coal ash a non- hazardous waste by definition...). I worked for many years in Coal fired plants... I know...
Do you understand the problems with oil and natural gas (you only see the refined end product at your house...). Ever spend time at a refinery....
Do you understand that when you fly off to vacation that you probably get a higher radiation dose from your single trip than the average Nuclear Plant workergets in a year in the US. Aircrew get far more radiation dose for many more years than the most exposed nuclear power plant worker ever gets (and no one is claiming that they have any long term radiation issues). Please note that I am not claiming that there is not an unresolved issue in the US with spent fuel. The US has, in my opionion, taken the stupidest approach to the problem - for self created political reasons. Most other countries in the world reprocess the fuel and stuff the worst gunk back into the reactors where it is burned up. The remaining stuff will decay in a much more reasonable period of time.
The medical profession throws radiation arround like nothing (X-rays, radiation tracer materials for testing, to radiation treatments). Because it is nominally serving a good purpose people never ask or care about how much dose they are getting (I find it amazing that most x-ray technitions cannot even tell you how much dose they are administering with that x-ray. At work I have to go through hours of training and briefings, with many manhours of work to reduce to the maximum exposure, just to get a small fraction of the dose that a common medical x-ray gives a patient. Note that I currently work in a Nuclear Power Plant).
Heck, the average coal fired power plant spits out 100 times the annual radiation emmisions from a nuclear plant - each day it operates (Oil and gas are better than that, but not perfect either). Yet we get people claiming that there are radiation problems with people downwind of nuclear plants - but no one has ever found such problemd downwind of fossil plants...
I am not saying that we should build Nuclear plants. or Coal Plants, or Natural Gas plants, or Solar plants, or Windmills, or any technology. Or that we should be generating hydrogen as our next fuel source. They all have their plusses and minuses (and perhaps I understand some of the plusses and minuses better than many).
I think an honest discussion of all of the plusses and minuses for all the energy technologies and conservation technologies would be very enlightening for the american and world people - only then can we really decide if drilling for oil in the ANWR makes sense or not at this time. Perhaps a law limiting a house to a 100 amp service might be a good thing (or even 60 amps).
I will say that we need to be doing something as most of the generation capacity in the US was built more than 30 years ago - with a design life of 40 years. Now much of it can be rehabed and kept going for another 10 or so years. But there is a limit to what is economical... I have worked in plants where equipment and systems were 60 years old (actually one plant had some piping over 100 years old...). I have a lot of appreaciation on what kinds of problems such equipment and systems have.
The fact of the matter is that in the nex 10 to 20 years the US is going to have to build a lot of power plants to replace the existing old ones... What kind are we going to build, or what mix of technologies? I think that is a very valid question - and I sure wish the American people would stop harping the old myths or the latest politically poplular theme and actually dig beyond the surface of the debates.
Perry
Blue824
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,614
lizzyd: "Perhaps instead of spending over $200 BILLION (and counting) on a completely unnecessary war, we could have invested in alternative energy research. Then perhaps we wouldn’t need the oil. "
I couldn''t agree more...and with a bunch of the other things people have said.
People should be taught the meaning of "sustainable living" and "biodiversity" before they graduate hs...maybe they''d put more thought into how their actions affect the entire world, and not just them. I guess I''m one of the few people that has never complained about paying more at the gas pump. What is life worth to you? Are the lives of endangered arctic animals worth those few extra bucks a month in your pocket??
The impact of the average U.S. citizen on the environment is approximately 3 times that of the average Italian, 13 times that of the average Brazilian, 35 times that of the average Indian, 140 times that of the average Bangladeshi, and 250 times that of the average sub-Saharan African.
Source: UNICEF, The State of the World''s Children, 1994.
I couldn''t agree more...and with a bunch of the other things people have said.
People should be taught the meaning of "sustainable living" and "biodiversity" before they graduate hs...maybe they''d put more thought into how their actions affect the entire world, and not just them. I guess I''m one of the few people that has never complained about paying more at the gas pump. What is life worth to you? Are the lives of endangered arctic animals worth those few extra bucks a month in your pocket??
The impact of the average U.S. citizen on the environment is approximately 3 times that of the average Italian, 13 times that of the average Brazilian, 35 times that of the average Indian, 140 times that of the average Bangladeshi, and 250 times that of the average sub-Saharan African.
Source: UNICEF, The State of the World''s Children, 1994.
I see this as sort of the same thing as the voting issue. If you don''t vote, you don''t have the right to complain about our administration. If you don''t conserve & seek other sources of energy, you don''t have a right to complain about the drilling in Alaska or the price of gas at the pump. It is our responsibility.
Sorry, my friend who drives a Suburban has no right to complain about gas prices. They made the concious *choice* to buy a vehicle that is a gas gussler - simply for appearance. They regret that *choice* now.
That being said on my soapbox, if one will be in a location for the long term & have the land w/ water sources - the way to go is geo-thermal. It''s not rocket science.
Sorry, my friend who drives a Suburban has no right to complain about gas prices. They made the concious *choice* to buy a vehicle that is a gas gussler - simply for appearance. They regret that *choice* now.
That being said on my soapbox, if one will be in a location for the long term & have the land w/ water sources - the way to go is geo-thermal. It''s not rocket science.
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
I voted. Despite having a car, I take the bus to work in L.A. (yes, unheard of), and I use energy efficient lighting in my house. It reaches 100 sometimes in the summer, but the ac is never used. The heater was turned on a total of 3 days this winter. My gas/electric bill is below $30 each month. I don''t consider myself a tree hugger, but I do conserve when I can.Date: 3/17/2005 106:11 AM
Author: fire&ice
I see this as sort of the same thing as the voting issue. If you don''t vote, you don''t have the right to complain about our administration. If you don''t conserve & seek other sources of energy, you don''t have a right to complain about the drilling in Alaska or the price of gas at the pump. It is our responsibility.
I think i have the right to complain.
For those people bashing this decision, you may want to do a little more research before you rant and rave how the US is going to hell. You may hate America, but it is the greatest country in the world hands down and the last hope for reason in this world. Anyone who disagrees, take a look at the corruption at the UN and lack of basic sense of what is right and wrong. Feel free to move to Europe or Canada where the high tax rates and government subsidies (welfare) promote an environment not conducive to working and results in high unemployment (~9%-10%) and low economic growth.
Sure we don't always do what is popular, but it is usually the right thing to do.
For example: With oil prices rising due to a number of reasons and the pumping threshold of most countries being reached if not already or in the near future, the drilling in ANWR will in the future be a supply of oil for our country and reduce our dependency on foreign oil. If energy prices continue to rise, the economy will slow down. If the rise is high enough, it will cause a recession until the prices go down. This means families will be without work. It may be unpopular, but it will help keep families with food on their plates in the future. The drilling will have the tightest environmental policies in the world up there. Sure oil spills do happen, but they can be cleaned up.
For example: Some complain about the Iraq war but forget about 9/11/01 and that most terrorists are of Arabic nationality. Although the media and democrats like to harp on the WMD's as given as the reason for the war, there were numerous other reasons given. Bush is correct that free and democratic societies do not promote or tolerate terrorists. He stated this in his State of the Union address in '02 or '03 before the war. Iraq may have been a sovereign state as someone said, but the fact of the matter is that Saddam Hussein was a totalitarian dictator and killed people in his own country. If he died, his crazy sons would take over and no progress would be made for a long long time. Iraq was shooting at our planes every day when we were enforcing the no fly zone. The UN made I believe 17 resolutions for Iraq to cooperate and dismantle their weapons program to no avail. Russia admitted last year that they had intelligence that showed Iraq was actively seeking a way to attack the US and informed the US about it before the war. Zarqarwi was in Baghdad before the war. The primary opposition to the war were all benifitting from the UN Oil for Food Program in Iraq that Saddam was using to bribe people for support to lift the sanctions. Not to mention, based on the information at the time to go to Iraq, it was believed by the world (and Clinton Administration) that Iraq did have WMDs. With a free and democratic Iraq whose government is favorable to the US, we have one more Ally in the Mideast who is also a neighbor to Iran. The events of the last few weeks in Lebanon, Egypt, Saudia Arabia and Palestine should show that freedom is on the march in the Mid East. People who are free and not oppressed and have a say in their lives do not blow themselves and innocent people up to scare others into submission. It may cost lives now, however, the freedom and lives saved from the future will more than make up for it.
As far as alternate sources of energy, people complain about nuclear energy plants, then they complain about wind power blocking their view. The fact of the matter is, it is expensive to pursue other energy sources. Unless there is a huge market for them, it will not pick up quickly and be expensive. Any change will take time and depends on technology. There is a reason we aren't all flying around in cars yet like some old movies and books had envisioned. Hybrid cars are a step in the right direction, however, it will take time to move from gasoline based transportation.
Gasoline prices would be cheaper if we had more refineries, but environmentalists have successfully blocked the building of more refineries in the US. We have plenty of oil right now and our crude oil inventories continue to grow. The refineries just can't produce enough. One problem is having to make 12 or so different blends of gas that the different states (CA) require. Each time they switch blends, they have to stop their process, re-tool for the new blend and start it up. This takes time and cuts into production and reduces supply.
In short, face the facts (not what the media tells you), don't jump to conclusions based on some whim, reason for yourself and have vision for the future.
Sorry for the rant, but I love this country and what we stand for and I hold human life as more valuable than 2000 acres out of about 19 million acres of a nature preserve.
Sure we don't always do what is popular, but it is usually the right thing to do.
For example: With oil prices rising due to a number of reasons and the pumping threshold of most countries being reached if not already or in the near future, the drilling in ANWR will in the future be a supply of oil for our country and reduce our dependency on foreign oil. If energy prices continue to rise, the economy will slow down. If the rise is high enough, it will cause a recession until the prices go down. This means families will be without work. It may be unpopular, but it will help keep families with food on their plates in the future. The drilling will have the tightest environmental policies in the world up there. Sure oil spills do happen, but they can be cleaned up.
For example: Some complain about the Iraq war but forget about 9/11/01 and that most terrorists are of Arabic nationality. Although the media and democrats like to harp on the WMD's as given as the reason for the war, there were numerous other reasons given. Bush is correct that free and democratic societies do not promote or tolerate terrorists. He stated this in his State of the Union address in '02 or '03 before the war. Iraq may have been a sovereign state as someone said, but the fact of the matter is that Saddam Hussein was a totalitarian dictator and killed people in his own country. If he died, his crazy sons would take over and no progress would be made for a long long time. Iraq was shooting at our planes every day when we were enforcing the no fly zone. The UN made I believe 17 resolutions for Iraq to cooperate and dismantle their weapons program to no avail. Russia admitted last year that they had intelligence that showed Iraq was actively seeking a way to attack the US and informed the US about it before the war. Zarqarwi was in Baghdad before the war. The primary opposition to the war were all benifitting from the UN Oil for Food Program in Iraq that Saddam was using to bribe people for support to lift the sanctions. Not to mention, based on the information at the time to go to Iraq, it was believed by the world (and Clinton Administration) that Iraq did have WMDs. With a free and democratic Iraq whose government is favorable to the US, we have one more Ally in the Mideast who is also a neighbor to Iran. The events of the last few weeks in Lebanon, Egypt, Saudia Arabia and Palestine should show that freedom is on the march in the Mid East. People who are free and not oppressed and have a say in their lives do not blow themselves and innocent people up to scare others into submission. It may cost lives now, however, the freedom and lives saved from the future will more than make up for it.
As far as alternate sources of energy, people complain about nuclear energy plants, then they complain about wind power blocking their view. The fact of the matter is, it is expensive to pursue other energy sources. Unless there is a huge market for them, it will not pick up quickly and be expensive. Any change will take time and depends on technology. There is a reason we aren't all flying around in cars yet like some old movies and books had envisioned. Hybrid cars are a step in the right direction, however, it will take time to move from gasoline based transportation.
Gasoline prices would be cheaper if we had more refineries, but environmentalists have successfully blocked the building of more refineries in the US. We have plenty of oil right now and our crude oil inventories continue to grow. The refineries just can't produce enough. One problem is having to make 12 or so different blends of gas that the different states (CA) require. Each time they switch blends, they have to stop their process, re-tool for the new blend and start it up. This takes time and cuts into production and reduces supply.
In short, face the facts (not what the media tells you), don't jump to conclusions based on some whim, reason for yourself and have vision for the future.
Sorry for the rant, but I love this country and what we stand for and I hold human life as more valuable than 2000 acres out of about 19 million acres of a nature preserve.
Not necessarily. What needs to done is rethink the way we look at the expense of other energy sources. A few years back, we were involved with geothermal installation. Yes, very expensive - UP FRONT. The payback was figured at 15 years - to be conservative. With the rising cost of heating and cooling resources, the payback is spiraling into a MUCH shorter payback. Once the cost is paid back, your expenditure is SO minimal. It''s clean, cheap & easy. For smaller installations, the payback is much quicker.Date: 3/17/2005 12:451 PM
The fact of the matter is, it is expensive to pursue other energy sources. Unless there is a huge market for them, it will not pick up quickly and be expensive. Any change will take time and depends on technology.
As far as the invasion of Iraq, I maintain that only time will tell. But, indications abound that the neo-conservative stance that a free Iraq will cause a domino effect w/ more democracies & a more stable middle east is quite possible. Don''t have my crystal ball handy.
Blue824
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,614
Feydakin: "We tried to by a Toyota Hybrid last fall.. There was not one to be found anywhere.. The dealer told us that there MIGHT be a few available in 6 months.. Everyone talks about them, but no one will buy them, so no one will make them.. Besides, at roughly 30mpg, they aren''t any more efficient than my vette that gets 28mpg on the highway.. And the vette is a hell of a lot of more fun to drive.. And all the electric cars do is move the power consumption from a localized source a central source.. But they STILL burn fuel, just not from their small gas tanks.. "
Actually, the reason they''re so hard to get a hold of is that there are HUGE waiting lists for them because so many people want them! I live in Chicago, my family just bought a honda hybrid, my friends family just converted all of their cars this summer to hybrids, both 1 honda, 2 toyotas, I have a friend who just bought the prius and I know 5-6 other people looking to buy and are on waiting lists. Its not because they made so few and no one wants them, its that they''re selling out faster than any other cars.
I understand that there has to be a middle ground, but isnt the answer instead of continuing the dependence on oil to slowly back down from it since it is cheaper and more sustainable? Maybe if the drilling in alaska came with an equal amount to be invested into new technologies I''d have a different feel about it, but I just feel they''re only focusing on one thing and not looking to the future.
Actually, the reason they''re so hard to get a hold of is that there are HUGE waiting lists for them because so many people want them! I live in Chicago, my family just bought a honda hybrid, my friends family just converted all of their cars this summer to hybrids, both 1 honda, 2 toyotas, I have a friend who just bought the prius and I know 5-6 other people looking to buy and are on waiting lists. Its not because they made so few and no one wants them, its that they''re selling out faster than any other cars.
I understand that there has to be a middle ground, but isnt the answer instead of continuing the dependence on oil to slowly back down from it since it is cheaper and more sustainable? Maybe if the drilling in alaska came with an equal amount to be invested into new technologies I''d have a different feel about it, but I just feel they''re only focusing on one thing and not looking to the future.
they will be leasing the land to the oil companies which will make them money. i believe it will net them a couple of billion. also, Bush put a billion dollars into hydrogen fuel cell research in addition to other reasearch for alternative fuels. it takes time and throwing money at it will not make it faster!
NewShiny
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2004
- Messages
- 300
A little something that all of us can do in addition to complaining to each other on PS.
http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/rollcall.php
-NS
http://www.johnkerry.com/petition/rollcall.php
-NS
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
not agreeing with the direction this country is headed is NOT and i repeat NOT hating america. get over it: we''ve got a bill of rights that gives us the right to disagree and speak out about that disagreement. so if you really love america, you can have a discussion without saying that those that disagree with you ''hate'' america.
peace, movie zombie
peace, movie zombie
undermining everything the US tries to do, no matter what the issue, can be considered "hating america". it's true that you have the freedom to state your opinion, critical or not, but in some countries you would be killed for doing it. i am just saying people need to take their heads out of their butts, see the big picture with issues and not promote knee-jerk reaction based on feelings. Doing the right thinig is not always popular, but it is better than not doing things and causing more harm in the future.
Yes, one can disagree. But, I tend to draw the line when one says they want to leave the country. To me, that says I hate America pretty loudly. And, having lived many places, we share an incredible standard of living. I am *lucky* to be here; so, this type of talk gets me going. Funny, Alec Baldwin never did move to France as promised.
Everything is cyclical w/ aministrations. The pendulum is constantly swinging. I just happen to be squarely in the middle and get bumped from side to side on the issues. My irritation (not that it seems to matter) is our dependency on oil as *the* source on fueling our cars - and people who don''t feel the need to conserve or invest into their future to reduce our energy consumption.
lmurden
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- May 3, 2004
- Messages
- 2,101
if i am wrong, please correct me. i am listening? are they facts or opinions? i would be interested to see who your sources are. i can probably guess.
the fact of the matter is, many people on the left believe that the US should mind its own business and let the world do what it wants no matter what. At the same time they preach human rights, yet when it comes to doing things in the world to promote them outside of America such as in the middle east, America is the bad guy. We're imperialists or occupiers or baby-killers. They equate terrorists who blow up innocent civilians to create instability as freedom fighters and compare them to revolutionists from the American revolution. The world is not a perfect place and it takes someone to step up and lead. Leaders don't take opinion polls and see who is with them before they do something, they do what is right regardless of group think.
You may say it should be a world decision, but look at the UN today. It doesn't work. Oil-for-food scandal, not enforcing their own resolutions, N Korea getting nukes, UN soldiers raping in Africa. And the EU is about to start selling arms to China who just this week agreed to use force if Taiwan tries to become an independent state.
America is not perfect, but we are lucky to live in this great country.
In case you are interested in "real" facts, have a look at www.townhall.com
the fact of the matter is, many people on the left believe that the US should mind its own business and let the world do what it wants no matter what. At the same time they preach human rights, yet when it comes to doing things in the world to promote them outside of America such as in the middle east, America is the bad guy. We're imperialists or occupiers or baby-killers. They equate terrorists who blow up innocent civilians to create instability as freedom fighters and compare them to revolutionists from the American revolution. The world is not a perfect place and it takes someone to step up and lead. Leaders don't take opinion polls and see who is with them before they do something, they do what is right regardless of group think.
You may say it should be a world decision, but look at the UN today. It doesn't work. Oil-for-food scandal, not enforcing their own resolutions, N Korea getting nukes, UN soldiers raping in Africa. And the EU is about to start selling arms to China who just this week agreed to use force if Taiwan tries to become an independent state.
America is not perfect, but we are lucky to live in this great country.
In case you are interested in "real" facts, have a look at www.townhall.com
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,161
Rank Amateur
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,555
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2003
- Messages
- 9,349
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,161
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
Cubheilma, are you saying that you hate america and its Bill of Rights and that you don''t want to live and abide by them? pointing out that other countries would have me and others killed for any dissent seems to indicate that you have a problem with america. who is the america hater?! certainly not me. i respect the Bill of Rights and the US Constitution to the point that i use them and would defend your right to use them as well. again, it would seem that a discussion of issues can be had without one side or the other reducing themselves to the level of a child and playing the name game...in this case: amercia hater.
so back to the issue: we americans are a spoiled lot. we haven''t had to do without many things, nor have we had to pay the full price for the cost of oil and other commodities. that appears to be changing daily. yesterday i paid $2.239/gallon for the lowest grade gas. i heard on the radio today that the price per barrel of oil has hit a new high at $57.00. additionally, its been reported that the oil taken out of ANWAR will be sold on the foreign market. how is that going to help us here?
peace, movie zombie
so back to the issue: we americans are a spoiled lot. we haven''t had to do without many things, nor have we had to pay the full price for the cost of oil and other commodities. that appears to be changing daily. yesterday i paid $2.239/gallon for the lowest grade gas. i heard on the radio today that the price per barrel of oil has hit a new high at $57.00. additionally, its been reported that the oil taken out of ANWAR will be sold on the foreign market. how is that going to help us here?
peace, movie zombie
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
Yippee!! Do we get to keep all the money???Date: 3/17/2005 6:41:29 PM
Author: crankydave
Sure! Why not! Don''t think you''ll need the giant chainsaw though. Just get everybody to jump up and down at the same time and it''ll probably break free!
Then we''ll build a giant bridge... A TOLL BRIDGE!
Dave
My college roommate made a sarcastic comment on his blog once, about how California should be independent, and this newspaper up in Sacramento made a huge deal about it and called him the head of a new militia!!
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
ForteKitty
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,239
Movie Zombie,
I was always taught that trying to squelch dissent and the opinions of others is about the most un-American act one can commit. After all, what good are these rights of ours if they can''t be exercised?
I too have respect for Cubeilma''s opinions, and would virgorously defend his right to voice them, while strenuously disagreeing with them, all the way to my grave.
Oh, and by the way, Cubeilma, they are only that. Opinions. Your "sources" are no less biased and agenda-ridden than anybody else''s. Much as you would like for them to be truths for all of us to live by, they are just your opinions, with which many red-blooded, America-loving, constitution defending citizens will disagree.
Cheers,
LizzyD
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
but, crankydave, who is going to get that $$$ and how is that going to help you and me at the gas pump?
the ''we'' that gets to keep the $$$ isn''t you and i....it will go to the stockholders of the oil company. in the mean time, the oil field will be depleted. its not like the oil companies pay a ''fair'' price to the government for the oil they will be taking...and make no mistake about it: since that oil is on federal land, we the citizens own that oil.
check out the sale of the alabama hills oil field here in california during the clinton administration...at the urging of al gore, yet. even the republicans wouldn''t touch that one and for more than 30 years the oil industry was lusting for it. the oil industry got a bargain and we the taxpaying public got ripped.
anwar will be the same.
peace, movie zombie
the ''we'' that gets to keep the $$$ isn''t you and i....it will go to the stockholders of the oil company. in the mean time, the oil field will be depleted. its not like the oil companies pay a ''fair'' price to the government for the oil they will be taking...and make no mistake about it: since that oil is on federal land, we the citizens own that oil.
check out the sale of the alabama hills oil field here in california during the clinton administration...at the urging of al gore, yet. even the republicans wouldn''t touch that one and for more than 30 years the oil industry was lusting for it. the oil industry got a bargain and we the taxpaying public got ripped.
anwar will be the same.
peace, movie zombie
Here''s what scares me about all of the "studies" and "evidence" that drilling will provide oil and cause no harm:
from the LATimes.com
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=716&e=30&u=/latimests/20050317/ts_latimes/inquirybeginsintovalidityofdataaboutyuccamountain
Here''s a bit of it:
By Ralph Vartabedian Times Staff Writer
Two federal agencies launched investigations Wednesday into evidence that government scientists had submitted phony data to help prove that a proposed nuclear dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada would be safe.
Hmmm, imagine that, an administration lying to get what it wants. Perish the thought
Cheers,
LizzyD
from the LATimes.com
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&ncid=716&e=30&u=/latimests/20050317/ts_latimes/inquirybeginsintovalidityofdataaboutyuccamountain
Here''s a bit of it:
By Ralph Vartabedian Times Staff Writer
Two federal agencies launched investigations Wednesday into evidence that government scientists had submitted phony data to help prove that a proposed nuclear dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada would be safe.
Hmmm, imagine that, an administration lying to get what it wants. Perish the thought
Cheers,
LizzyD
movie zombie:
you need to re-read what I said. I agreed with you that you are able to say what you want, whether it is critical of america or not. it's your opinion and you have your right to it. that is what america is about and makes it so great.
It is really a BIG stretch to imply that i hate america because i pointed out that in other countries, public dissent would get them killed. it is a simple statement of fact and i in no way have said anything bad about this county. period. As far as the bill of rights and constitution i totally agree. Individuals have their rights and and as it says the rights are endowed by our Creator, no one else.
i am certainly not a child and any attempt to reduce me to one by claiming i called all people who disagree with me "america haters" is absurd. I said and I quote "For those people bashing this decision, you may want to do a little more research before you rant and rave how the US is going to hell. You may hate America, but it is the greatest country in the world hands down and the last hope for reason in this world."
Claiming the US is going to hell and that someone wants to leave the country MAY imply that they hate america. That is why I said "may hate America".
As far as selling the oil to foreign countries it is a little far off to speculate about that. Chances are by then, we will need every drop of oil we can get.
you need to re-read what I said. I agreed with you that you are able to say what you want, whether it is critical of america or not. it's your opinion and you have your right to it. that is what america is about and makes it so great.
It is really a BIG stretch to imply that i hate america because i pointed out that in other countries, public dissent would get them killed. it is a simple statement of fact and i in no way have said anything bad about this county. period. As far as the bill of rights and constitution i totally agree. Individuals have their rights and and as it says the rights are endowed by our Creator, no one else.
i am certainly not a child and any attempt to reduce me to one by claiming i called all people who disagree with me "america haters" is absurd. I said and I quote "For those people bashing this decision, you may want to do a little more research before you rant and rave how the US is going to hell. You may hate America, but it is the greatest country in the world hands down and the last hope for reason in this world."
Claiming the US is going to hell and that someone wants to leave the country MAY imply that they hate america. That is why I said "may hate America".
As far as selling the oil to foreign countries it is a little far off to speculate about that. Chances are by then, we will need every drop of oil we can get.
- Status
300x240.png)