Alternative Fuels May Be Postponed.... Again????

Discussion in 'Economics' started by libertad, Jul 25, 2008.

  1. We have become a society of pigs in a trough when it comes to our dependence on oil (no offense meant towards pigs). We would sooner plunder the Arctic Circle for oil (after the ice cap melts away) for a short-term "fix" than really start to solve this crisis through better technology. Amazing and sad as well.
  2. we need the US gov to mandate that hydrogen be added to every damn gas station, even if the Gov has to pay for it. this is the main thing holding back fuel cell cars. Yes, the hydrogen needs to be produced in the first place, but can be done with pollution free methods (solar, wind, hydro etc). At any rate, it would be the first step towards a hydrogen economy. A resource you can never run out of, ever (most abundant element in the universe), and the process of "burning" it via a fuel cell produces only heat and water. Electric cars don't cut it cause they can't be fueled in just a few minutes time, and have far to little range for a serious road trip. ya need 300 miles minimum.
  3. clacy


    I think by far the solution to our energy problem that makes the most sense is nuclear.

    Build nuclear plants as fast as possible in the US. Nuclear energy is be far the cleanest on the planet (at this point). If we used nuclear for the vast majority of our home energy, we could then use our natural gas for gasoline and virtually eliminate the need for foreign oil outside of Canada and Mexico.

    Problem solved.....
  4. Do you understand how a nuclear reactor works and its inputs & outputs?
  5. I agree nuclear should be looked at but I'm not sold on natural gas as a long-term fix for vehicles. Using a finite resource to power vehicles will just get us into the same trouble we are in now just a little further down the road. The middle east also has tons of reserves of natural gas too. When gasoline was first used in the US in the early 1900s we had plenty of oil reserves in this country also. I am intrigued by hydrogen power and fuel-cells. This is what the media should be talking about not drilling for more oil. The whole debate regarding offshore drilling is absurd and is just a smoke screen.
  6. RhinoGG

    RhinoGG Guest

    Hydrogen will be the power source for the future. How far off that future is, depends on many factors.

    I'd like to see a hydrogen option in at least one gas station out of ten. That would be a start at least. The hydrogen future can be here in less than 5 years, or it can take 500 years.

    It all depends on how dumb-fucked our next political leaders will be. Given the recent past, unless they figure out a way to make hydrogen give a blow job or how to fuck it in up the ass, no politician is touching the stuff. And since the corporate world can't figure out how t make any money off it yet, I think we're looking at the 500+ year mark. Too bad for our children.
  7. Drill now
  8. clacy


    Because nuclear power plants do not burn fuel, they do not emit combustion by-products. By substituting for other fuels in electricity production, nuclear energy has significantly reduced U.S. and global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the chief greenhouse gas.

    n Between 1973 and 1999, U.S. nuclear power plants reduced cumulative emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide—pollutants controlled under the Clean Air Act—by 31.6 million tons and 61.7 million tons, respectively. Over this same period, the nation's nuclear plants reduced the cumulative amount of carbon emissions by 2.61 billion tons of carbon. In 1999 alone, U.S. nuclear plants prevented the discharge of 168 million metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere.

    n Worldwide, about 430 nuclear power plants reduced the world's emissions of CO2 by about 500 million metric tons of carbon during 1997, the latest year for which data is available. In many countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, nuclear energy helped reduce—that is, mitigate the increase of—carbon emissions per capita.

    n Environmental responsibility is an important part of nuclear power plant management. Plants are designed, built and regulated to prevent radioactive emissions. And nuclear power plants voluntarily work to protect nearby wildlife and their habitats.

    n Nuclear power plants produce relatively small amounts of used fuel and low-level waste. The management, packaging, transportation and disposal of this waste is strictly regulated and carefully controlled by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and Department of Transportation.
  9. 50_Bip


    I say open up that stupid strategic petroleum reserve for the short-term, and develop nuclear, wind, solar, and geothermal power stations for electricity while exploring hydrogen and natural gas for transportation. Airplanes and trains will probably still have to run on petroleum, so use America's reserves to power them.

    Ethanol and biofuels, while interesting, do not present any sort of viable long-term solution to our problems. Drilling more is drilling ourselves deeper into this pit of despair and only prolongs the problem. The Republicans are going to lose this election becasue of their antiquated "drill drill" energy policy.
    #10     Jul 25, 2008