Let me get this straight

[Insp4]

 

[Insp4]

 

[Dog Wonder]

Knuckledraggers give you advice?

 

[Insp4]

 

[Insp4]

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

So which is it?


Have we not made a lot of progress reducing pollution from fossil fuels?

Are cars not far more fuel efficient and far less polluting than even 20 years ago?

My father worked at a glass plant. He could tell you a few things about the hurdles the company has to clear every year to make sure they are pollution compliant. They use scrubbers to clean the air before it ever reaches outside the plant. You could say they would save money if they went green. Then they would not have to worry about complying with air pollution from their furnaces however, that glass plant uses enough gas in a day to power the whole town for a week (probably more than that). Do you have ANY idea how many damn windmills and solar it would take JUST to power that factory?

Do you want to spend $600 dollars a month for electric instead of $100 because it cost 3X the money to maintain the infrastructure that puts out less than half the power?

Again..... the switch should be a natural progression and not some political agenda that ignores the realities of the deficiencies of what green energy can realistically offer.

Should green energy be developed? YES!!! Should green energy be improved? YES!!! Should we invest billions of dollars deploying a technology that currently cannot even remotely meet our energy needs? NO!!!

KCFlyer this is a serious question. Can you do basic math? If you could you would see how stupid it is to spend multiples of money to get far less power.

You also totally ignore that it takes mining and fossil fuels to feed green energy. Miners (some children) risk their lives in third world countries mining the materials for your idyllic future. How much fuel do you think it takes to transport all those materials around (ships and most semis do not run off green energy), to manufacture those raw goods into usable material, then transport the finished product to the installation location?

Do you think mining for raw materials to feed green energy is less destructive than pumping oil?

I think if you look at green energy objectively you will see that a fast, politically driven transition, is foolish and destructive. Though if there is one thing Democrats are good at it is destroying, just ask any "mostly peaceful" protester as they stand in front of a burning building they just ignited.

No comment.

Yeah I would not want to answer either if I were you.

It just highlights your ignorance and stupidity.

You just can't admit you fell for a con can you?

 

[Dog Wonder]

Talking to yourself? Can't admit you fell for your own con?

 

[KCFlyer]

No comment.

Yeah I would not want to answer either if I were you.

It just highlights your ignorance and stupidity.

You just can't admit you fell for a con can you?

I'm not sure why you believe that I think it should be "all or nothing". Windmills froze in Texas....Get rid of them. Gas lines froze in Texas? Well hell...it was historically cold there. Both forms of energy failed.

I'm not sure where you get that I propose eliminating fossil fuels. If anything, my big reason for conserving fossil fuels has squat to do with global warming...it's got more to do with making sure that my grandson has some available when he gets to be my age. But you fall for the political bullshit around stuff and somehow thing we ALL want windmills and solar. That helps. If windmills mean that my grandson can have oil when he needs it, then I'm all for it.

But to conservatives it's like "yee haw....looky looky at all that oil in the tar sands we found....let's get it and use it and if there is too much for us to use, lets export it and make shareholders in oil companies even richer. " I kind of look at it like "do we need tar sands today". And I keep coming back to "no". And I'd prefer to leave it in the ground until we reach a point where we DO need it - and by that time, maybe technology will have advanced to make that process cleaner. Do you have a problem with that? Especially considering all the tar sands crap isn't being burned in your car - it's being exported. BUT....those tree hugging liberals only want solar and wind, so let's drill baby drill and ship a non renewable resource OUT of the country. When the day comes that we need it....uh oh....it's a crisis.

Not sure how old you are, but for years the right has called Jimmy Carter "the worst president ever". They mocked him because when the US was at the mercy of OPEC, he urged us to turn the thermostat down and wore a sweater. He also said that we would not import a single drop more than we did in 1977. He proposed wind. He proposed solar. He proposed fracking and tar sands. He proposed nuclear. He proposed coal. He sounded damn near Republican there. But you all mocked that. Then Raygun got elected and we went back to importing oil.

I think there is room for solar and wind right there alongside oil. Maybe there would be subsidies into research in those....but not with Republicans. If it ain't out, we don't need it. We'll deal with it when that happens. so drill baby drill.

YOu seem to think that liberals are in lockstep with AOC and "the squad" and whatever nasty groups are out there. I couldn't care less about global warming. I like clean air and I like clean water and I like to conserve (a word lost on conservatives) non renewable resources, even though it seems like we have an endless supply just waiting to be tapped. YOu guys aren't open to anything. Solar? Solyndra. Wind? Freezing weather in Texas. Oddly, we had just a frigid a winter here in Kansas and our wind production was just chugging right along. But windmills kills birds and the noise causes cancer. Therefore, let's drill baby drill because we have enough. Because to conserve is too liberal.

 

[KCFlyer]

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

I'm not sure why you believe that I think it should be "all or nothing". Windmills froze in Texas....Get rid of them. Gas lines froze in Texas? Well hell...it was historically cold there. Both forms of energy failed.

I don't know what you believe. I know you support a political party pushing it. That is all I need to know.

I'm not sure where you get that I propose eliminating fossil fuels. If anything, my big reason for conserving fossil fuels has squat to do with global warming...it's got more to do with making sure that my grandson has some available when he gets to be my age. But you fall for the political bullshit around stuff and somehow thing we ALL want windmills and solar. That helps. If windmills mean that my grandson can have oil when he needs it, then I'm all for it.

You want to bury your son into debt with the Chinese? Because that is exactly what is paying for this "Green New Deal".

But to conservatives it's like "yee haw....looky looky at all that oil in the tar sands we found....let's get it and use it and if there is too much for us to use, lets export it and make shareholders in oil companies even richer. " I kind of look at it like "do we need tar sands today". And I keep coming back to "no". And I'd prefer to leave it in the ground until we reach a point where we DO need it - and by that time, maybe technology will have advanced to make that process cleaner. Do you have a problem with that? Especially considering all the tar sands crap isn't being burned in your car - it's being exported. BUT....those tree hugging liberals only want solar and wind, so let's drill baby drill and ship a non renewable resource OUT of the country. When the day comes that we need it....uh oh....it's a crisis.

I would prefer to keep our oil in the country but if everyone took that attitude trade would cease to exist.

No I do not have a problem with conserving supplies. However I believe we are nearing a breakthrough in energy production. Say within the next 20 years or so.

Not sure how old you are, but for years the right has called Jimmy Carter "the worst president ever". They mocked him because when the US was at the mercy of OPEC, he urged us to turn the thermostat down and wore a sweater. He also said that we would not import a single drop more than we did in 1977. He proposed wind. He proposed solar. He proposed fracking and tar sands. He proposed nuclear. He proposed coal. He sounded damn near Republican there. But you all mocked that. Then Raygun got elected and we went back to importing oil.

I am 44. Carter was before my time. I honestly don't really even know much about Carter.

I think there is room for solar and wind right there alongside oil. Maybe there would be subsidies into research in those....but not with Republicans. If it ain't out, we don't need it. We'll deal with it when that happens. so drill baby drill.

Of course there is room. But again it should be a natural progression as it becomes viable not some date chosen by Democrats pushing an agenda.

YOu seem to think that liberals are in lockstep with AOC and "the squad" and whatever nasty groups are out there. I couldn't care less about global warming. I like clean air and I like clean water and I like to conserve (a word lost on conservatives) non renewable resources, even though it seems like we have an endless supply just waiting to be tapped. YOu guys aren't open to anything. Solar? Solyndra. Wind? Freezing weather in Texas. Oddly, we had just a frigid a winter here in Kansas and our wind production was just chugging right along. But windmills kills birds and the noise causes cancer. Therefore, let's drill baby drill because we have enough. Because to conserve is too liberal.

Actually they have developed a new version of bladeless windmill. I will post a link later.

Somebody is voting for AOC and the rest of those nasty ass cunts she runs with. It sure as hell is not the Republicans.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

Here is a link referencing the bladeless wind turbines.

These bladeless wind turbines shake to generate electricity

The Verge is about technology and how it makes us feel. Founded in 2011, we offer our audience everything from breaking news to reviews to award-winning features and investigations, on our site, in video, and in podcasts.

www.theverge.com

This video goes over some of the concepts.


Some people believe these are not viable. They are still being researched.

 

[KCFlyer]

You want to bury your son into debt with the Chinese? Because that is exactly what is paying for this "Green New Deal".

At least this debt pays for something. What about the debt the his predecessor was running up during the greatest economy in the recorded history of man??

 

[KCFlyer]

Somebody is voting for AOC and the rest of those nasty ass cunts she runs with. It sure as hell is not the Republicans.

I didn't vote for AOC....I live in Kansas, so I'm not able to...nor can I vote for the other nasty assed cunts, for the same reason. My representative is a democrat, but you likely have never heard of her since she spends her time in DC working for her district and not trying to make a national name for herself. Yep....when AOC is up for reelection, I hope she loses. Of course, Republicans, who hate fighting FOR anything....they only disparage anything they didn't think of...and they don't think of much....and they love to personalize. There are 535 representatives and Senators.. Right wing media focuses on AOC and "the squad", which leaves about 530 more votes that have to be cast. And Republicans would have to find a new boogey man to scare people with.

 

[La Li Lu Le Lo]

At least this debt pays for something. What about the debt the his predecessor was running up during the greatest economy in the recorded history of man??

Can you give some examples?

 

[KCFlyer]

Can you give some examples?

Did you not look at the debt numbers for the past 4 years? I don't know what he spent it on, but he spent like he and Obama were on a 3 day drunk together.