Quote:
Originally Posted by fishalert
...The problem is not with the democrats. The republicans have been the ones in charge until the last two years, even now the democrats don't have an over riding veto power. Hopefully the environmentalists will continue their work. Where are you going to camp when the environment is ruined? The answer is not oil in the solving of our problems. It's creating a competition by the use of alternative fuels. Until this happens the oil companies will control our economy and our way of life. I live in Florida and I don't want our beaches destroyed by big oil...
|
[rant]I have been living off the Louisiana coast for most of my life and the beaches are just fine. Louisiana, Texas, and Mississippi have been helping you enjoy your way of life.
The problem with environmentalists is that they do not think. The leadership of the environmental movement is hardly concerned with the environment. Tell me the ones that are walking the walk and not talking the talk. So far, they are still flying on their jets, living in their mansions, and only planting a few trees for their trouble. Call me when they move into a 3,000 sq ft house, give up the Hummer for a Prius, fly coach, and don't visit that faraway island or mountain. Truly many of the rank and file are living the way the leadership directs and this is not directed at them.
If the leadership were truly concerned with global warming (those late snows are killers aren't they...that's why they have started calling it climate change), they would be doing things differently. I suspect most of them are luddites and have a fear of technology or want to roll the world back to a much earlier time for everyone but themselves.
Everyone talks about alternative fuels, but do they look at what that entails? For example, everyone likes to talk about fuel cells and hydrogen. We get hydrogen from seawater right? Nope...FROM OIL & NATURAL GAS!!! No one will build the facilities to extract H2 because the cheap way to do it is with nuclear reactors.
Everyone remembers the oil spills off California and elsewhere, and Three Mile Island. If our technology had been static maybe the environmentalists would have a valid point. However, when TMI (Three Mile Island) occurred cell phones weren't around, computer networks were nothing like they were now, and Microsoft was a dinky small, but promising company.
In the oil patch and nuclear industries DCS (Distributed Control Systems) and IPF (Instrument Protective ?) systems are norm. Offshore, blowout protection devices work wonders. These devices offer advances in control and safety as much as desktop computers, the Internet, cell phones are over the push button phone did.
I blame the Republicans for being tepid against the Democrats and environmentalists. No one has spoken the truth yet that the environmentalists do not want cheap fuel. They want fuel to be expensive and heavily taxed--period--. The idea is to keep you from driving or hauling your trailer around.
So far, the environmentalists have done a good job. Gasoline is up over $0.80/gal in less than a year (not including what they have done to grain prices), I haven't a clue what has happened to diesel. Besides for the dems, its not a question of override authority. The dems in Congress get to write laws, the President can veto them. They can keep writing bills and wear the President out IF THEY WANT TO. I do not know why they haven't done this.[/rant off]
Let me apologize for this rant. If it gets deleted, I will not get upset. I am sure I overstepped.
The truth is alternative fuels have a long way to go. Alcohol can help, but not as long as it is limited to grains. The places where alcohol additives have worked it wasn't limited to corn alone. Corn is one of the poorer feedstocks for alcohol.
Hydrogen will likely never really work as a fuel unless fission or fusion reactors. Right now the source for H2 (hydrogen) is from natural gas and oil production. H2 is used to fortify fuels and is especially difficult to handle. The fires are invisible, leaks are diffiuclt to locate, and storage difficult.
The really big problem for H2 is how you transport it. It can be moved in current pipelines, but need about 3 times as much by volume. For current gas stations imagine have to triple the size of your tanks. Instead of one truck delivering fuel, you would need 3. Not to mention the fact of the problem is that H2 is cryogenic, meaning its colder than (just about?) any other liquid. Stuff that cold is a lot more difficult to handle than gas or diesel, even if you have your cell phone on.
I am sure in time the technology to handle H2 will be worked out, but it is going to take a decade or so to figure out. The high price of rare metals won't speed development either. Not only that, the technology has to be sound enough that an insurance company will be willing to offer insurance. The first ruptured tank that freezes a family to death, or blows the roof off a house is going to happen.
Finally do not forget that politics of the situation. If you start making your own biodiesel or using solar/wind power to charge your car, the government is going to want its cut of road use taxes.