West Texas would be an option, if the ecologists don't ruin it by worrying about migratory birds.
On Jun 28, 10:46 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > Where are you going to put all of them. When you look at what they > produce from acres of solar panels and windmills, which are dependent on > the wind blowing at a certain minimum speed even to work at all and then > the noise they make disturbs the fauna of the area, what would be enough > of them. Add to that all the NIMBY of those who live where the > windmills would work andyou have a problem, especially when the NIMBY > folks are congressmen and senators (Kerry, Kennedy, Frank, Markey ring a > bell?). Then there is the storage and transportation problem of the > product which is not working well yet either. I can see doing research > on these methods but I cannot see stopping the production of what we > know works and the outlawing of other means of production which we know > can produce what is required while the research is going on. That is > what has been going on with out congressmen and senators and the > no-drilling legislation. We hear that it will take 10 years to bring > the wells on line - and we have been hearing this for years now. If > they had drilled when the subject first came up, the wells would be > online now and we would not be dependent on foreign oil now but I guess > our betters missed that point. > > > > Mark wrote: > > Gee dick.... there are not enough of them... > > > On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 10:26 AM, dick thompson > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > And they are not capable of meeting even a small percentage of the > > US use of electricity. Nor will they be able to in the near future. > > > I was talking about the carbon credits. The credits are used to > > plant trees, not windmills. Guess you missed that point. > > > Mark wrote: > > >> Dick, > > >> Just what are you talking about..... Alternative energy sources > >> exist NOW. just go to Palm Springs and look at the hill sides... > >> anybody can count the numbers of wind turbines.. no science > >> involved. A geo-thermal plant is easily identified as is a > >> nuclear plant and a hydoelectric dam, hearing people KNOW the > >> difference between an electric car and a gas/diesel motor (the > >> deaf look for the tail pipe or lack thereof) There is NO mystery > >> in accountability. You simply use oil profits to put itself out > >> of business. > > >> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:36 AM, dick thompson > >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >> How would you do that and how would you enforce it. > > >> Reminds me of the carbon trade/carbon credits scam. You pay > >> x amount of dollars to plant trees somewhere and that gives > >> you the right to trash the regulatory laws about energy use. > >> At what point do you prove that those dollars actually > >> planted trees that are going to be taken care of and replace > >> the carbon you used up. That part of the equation is > >> missing. Do you think that those peons who plant the trees > >> are going to insure that they grow and prosper? If you don't > >> enforce the one side of the equation, then you do not have an > >> equation at all, you have a scam, and that is what it is. > >> Same principle with your suggestion. I can throw x amount of > >> dollars at alternate energy source research but unless it is > >> actually tracked to make sure it is used as it is supposed to > >> be then it is garbage. Look at the AGW conference that was > >> held earlier this year. They held it in Bali and the > >> attendees all flew in on their private jets for a week of > >> swanning around a fancy resort and making soundbites about > >> all the good they were doing. Then they got back in their > >> private jets and flew elsewhere to tell us we need to > >> conserve energy and use one sheet of toilet paper and pay > >> twice as much in gas tax and pay more for heating and cooling > >> because it is for the good of the environment and for the > >> cheeellllddddrrrreeeennnn. Thank you Algore. > > >> THE ANNOINTED ONE wrote: > >>> Keith, who owns and therefore profits from oil exploration and > >>> subsequent drilling has EVERYTHING to do with whether or not it is > >>> actually done or even allowed. If the Gringo-American people > >>> actually > >>> had a vested interest in oil and its profits (not just the taxes > >>> from > >>> its use) you could bet that derricks would be springing up all > >>> over > >>> the place as well as refineries and piping systems. Why should > >>> they > >>> take the chance on despoiling the natural beauty of an area just > >>> to > >>> have a multinational take the money and run ?? Unfettered > >>> drilling > >>> and profit taking by oil that stayed at home would be a great > >>> boon and > >>> even the looneys know that and would, I'm sure, be in favor > >>> especially > >>> if a portion of that profit would be used solely for developing > >>> alternative energy and eventually CLOSING the wells and > >>> refineries. > >>> The Chinese get it.... but they despoil OTHER countries and areas > >>> to > >>> accomplish the goal of garnering profit for their Government. > > >>> On Jun 27, 6:02 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > >>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> Holly, > > >>>> I don't know what your comment has to do with our Nation having a > >>>> comprehensive energy plan. The Chinese at the behest of Cuba > >>>> is getting > >>>> ready to start drilling just a few miles off of our coastline > >>>> for oil. We > >>>> are not, because of the current Administration, who has refused > >>>> to allow for > >>>> more oil exploration, and instead is "capping and trading" > >>>> energy, under > >>>> some policy based on fraudulent, non-existent scientific data > >>>> that claims we > >>>> are "Globally Warming". > > >>>> Again, I haven't seen you up in arms about our current lack of a > >>>> comprehensive energy plan. > > >>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 7:46 PM, Hollywood > >>>> <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>wrote: > > >>>>> KIT, > > >>>>> The Chinese and Cubans are communists, they own the oil > >>>>> industry in > >>>>> their respective countries. They might well pay a private Corp. > >>>>> to > >>>>> explore for and even bring up the product (oil) but the Govt.'s > >>>>> of > >>>>> China & Cuba OWN it. > > >>>>> On Jun 27, 5:33 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> > >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>> Why would we want the government involved in regulating this? > >>>>>> Why would > > >>>>> we > > >>>>>> want the government involved in "capping or trading" energy? > > >>>>>> Why is our government not encouraging a Comprehensive Energy > >>>>>> Policy, > > >>>>> which > > >>>>>> promotes alternative energies while also attempting to allow > >>>>>> for private > >>>>>> entities to explore for more oil reserves, as are the Chinese > >>>>>> and Cubans > >>>>>> right off of our coast? > > >>>>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 2:15 PM, ConservativeJack < > > >>>>> > [email protected] > >>>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > >>>>>>> I don't see anything surprising here. Alternative Energy > >>>>>>> providers say > >>>>>>> this is a good thing and that it will all be peachy in the > >>>>>>> end. > >>>>>>> The companies that stand to lose billions or even eventually > >>>>>>> be put > >>>>>>> out of business, claim it's doom and gloom. > >>>>>>> What else would anyone expect to be said by the opposing > >>>>>>> sides? > >>>>>>> So the choice is I can believe one or the other, based on > >>>>>>> what I WANT > >>>>>>> to believe, or I can believe that both are stating things in > >>>>>>> terms > >>>>>>> that suit their own interests and that things will probably > >>>>>>> end up (as > >>>>>>> always) neither as bad or good as predicted. > > >>>>>>> On Jun 27, 10:35 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> > >>>>>>> <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> [Get Copyright Permissions] > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> > >>>>>>>> E-Mail > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g1/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | > >>>>>>>> Print > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g2/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | > >>>>>>>> Save > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/s13/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> > >>>>>>>> | Post > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g3/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | > >>>>>>>> Get > > >>>>> Photos > > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/g5/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> | > >>>>>>>> Get > >>>>>>>> Reprints > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/s17/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86> > > >>>>> | > > >>>>>>>> Reuse Options > >>>>>>>> <http://license.icopyright.net/3.5721?icx_id=D9933DL86 > > >>>>>>>> Jun 27, 11:12 AM EDT > > >>>>>>>> Winners and losers emerge in climate bill > > >>>>>>>> By CHRIS KAHN > >>>>>>>> AP Energy Writer > > >>>>>>>> NEW YORK (AP) -- In addition to raising energy prices, the > >>>>>>>> climate > >>>>>>>> legislation that's winding through Congress would create a > >>>>>>>> parallel > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
