Or when you have to tell your kids why we all have to were grey overalls and listen to the grateful dead at the hippy death camps. Or that they can't swim in that lake because it is enviromentally protected and the little cute darter fish will be disturbed. Or when you tell your kids what it was like in the old days when you could drive a car to work and not have to ride a bike because you could afford the price of gas. Or when you could actually fly to another city to visit grandma and grandpa, and not just be able to send them a $10 postal letter on recycled paper. Or when we did not have big brother telling us how to speak and live our lives because it wasn't a govenment agency.
Grey overalls, hippy death camps, no swimming b/c of darter fish, recycled paper?, hey we have solar powered airplanes and a spacestation, big brother/ big oil/ big babylon, think my brother, be wise, be smart, be realistic, be good, be serious. You've got to be kidding me. Great post, Refman . Bad post Phi83 .
Again this is an example of a bad post. I especially like the no cars and having to ride your bike part seeing as how others have been having an intelligent discussion about clean energy/electric cars. Technologies we already have, MORON!!! Forgive me, but you've just got to think a wee bit man.
Out of curiosity, where are these so-called "hippy death camps." I'm always amazed at the degree to which we can stretch our flights of fantasy about the future. You guys have so little faith in how our country works, it's amazing. On one hand, if the liberal environmentalists take over, we are all doomed to Birkenstocks and bicycles while working on our communal farm barely surviving on tofu and wheat pellets. On the other hand, if the conservative suits take over, we are all going to be forced to live on respirators as we toil away under cancer causing radiation now that the ozone layer is gone, but at least we'll all be rich! LOL! It is entirely possible that, like we've done for a couple hundred years now, we will evolve and grow, adapt and change. We'll learn from our mistakes and make all new one's in the process. Or, in more simplistic terms, this too shall pass. You guys crack me up.
Here’s an interesting page on Iceland’s proposal to go to a “hydrogen economy.” http://www.hydrogen.is/ Achebe, you were a geologist? That doesn’t fit my mental image of you for some reason. As a geologist I’ve got a question for you. Why do we hear so little talk in the US about the oil sands in northern Alberta? The recoverable reserves there are greater than the reserves in Saudi Arabia, yet it’s never included in regular oil reserves numbers. I’ve never understood this, but I’ve never pinned a geologist down on it either. “According to the Alberta Energy and Utilities Board, Alberta's oil sand deposits contain 1.7 trillion to 2.5 trillion barrels of bitumen, of which over 300 billion are recoverable with current technology. The Athasbasca Oil Sands Deposit is, by itself, the largest petroleum resource in the world.” http://www.syncrude.com/who_we_are/01_02.html Why is the US even wasting time on ANWAR? Buy Canadian.
Either I'm REALLY tired or Grizzled and I just solved the energy crisis in this country and got some really good beer out of the deal. Perhaps WE should be running for office.
Not only do we invade for their freshwater reserves, we get free oil as a bonus... http://www.toledoc.com/forums/thaigold/posts/158.html Much has been discussed about non-conventional oil sources and alternative energy sources. It is true that there is a substantial amount of non- conventional oil. The problem of course is that it is much more costly and much of this oil is not economically recoverable at current prices. The Oil Sands of Canada’s Athabasca region may have as much as 300 to 600 billion barrels equivalent oil. The processing of tar sands (effectively asphalt) is difficult and the impurities creates a whole set of environmental problems as it is mined and therefore is likely to face a lot of political pressure. There are at least 2 major producers in the region: Syncrude (a consortium of oil producers), and Suncor (SU). The same problems arise from oil shales. The problems of course are the included heavy metals and sulfur content. A while back when they were discussing opening up the ANWR on Meet the Press in more detail. The con-politician (forgot who) made the point that the oil provided by ANWR would not even be consumed by Americans because it's grade is typically lower (more impurities) than the type we consume (Desert oil). We'd probably be selling the oil to other countries. Yeah, you could use that money to buy better oil, but this isn't going to provide some immediate economic impact to the people other than the companies who contract the drilling...
At some point, we're going to hit critical mass and fossil fuels will go the way of the dinosaur (he he, that was funny ). Everywhere I look - magazines, billboards (one HUGE one in downtown Houston on the merge lane to I45 North), TV, etc - there are advertisements, stories and information about new technologies and how we will eventually give up our dependence on fossil fuels. If this were just in "Hippie Death Camp" Magazines ( ) I would think it wasn't important. But energy companies are going out of their way to not just tell people they are looking into it, they are actually doing the research. If hydrogen, solar, wind, hydroelectric and even natural gas are more plentiful, cheaper and cleaner, who the hell wouldn't look into them? Also, given the fact that I read there are something like 5 car manufacturers who either have in production or are set to launch in the next year gas/electric hybrids, I'm guessing it's a little more than a fad. Ford is actually releasing the HEV, a hybrid gas/electric SUV!!!
From Google: "Your search - "hippie death camps" - did not match any documents. Suggestions: - Make sure all words are spelled correctly. - Try different keywords. - Try more general keywords."
Hey! I did NOT grant permission to use images of my car in this thread! If I wasn't such a hippie, I would litigate. On a serious note, a la Refman's sensible post concerning the search for non-petroleum-based energy sources: politics aside (I'm serious), we could all push for greater Dept. of Energy research funding. Bush's proposed budget for fiscal year 2002 cut $700 million from the DOE's fiscal year 2001 level. I think bipartisan support for DOE research money makes sense.
As Jeff noted earlier it seems that the oil companies have undertaken a lot of this research. Perhaps this is an instance where Bush's connections to big oil can prove useful to the US in that since the companies are doing the research the gov won't have to fund it.
