West Texas is not the most beautiful place on the planet. They have cattle and farming and oil wells, but mostly, they have wind.
On Jun 28, 10:52 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > But they will and you know they will. We will find the equivalent of > spiking trees by groups like ELF sabotaging the windmills and solar > panels because of the migratory birds. And I would assume West Texas > is also good for other things as well. Don't they have agriculture > there now? Where are you going to put that? > > > > RichardForbes wrote: > > 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 > > ... > > 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
