$ 4.09 for reg. unleaded.

[Seawytch]

although you would think people would be all over this because it would create jobs....

Also i read someplace if we used 3% of Arizona for solar we could get all the power we need. ....3%....

And NOBODY is saying we are going to get off our oil glut all in one fell swoop, but we aren't doing ANYTHING to move away from it. If we stopped using so much oil to power our vehicles, there would be MORE of it to use for the rest of our petroleum needs. If we used more wind and solar to produce our electricity needs, we would have more oil to use for other things. How many states still don't require recycling?

Wind generated power......This is very expensive. A friend of mine who works for a company that engineers and manufactures parts and components made of different metals. The firm just landed a contract with GE Energy Division. The contract is to build bearings and gears for wind turbines. The COST, not the retail price for each assembly is $150,000. That's just for the gear/bearings. The bottom line is wind turbines are very expensive. In fact they are cost prohibitive. Add in the rest of the components that make up the entire assembly, purchase of land, the infrastructure to carry the electricity to market and of course the NIMBY factor and we have one big fat bureaucratic boondoggle.
Solar generated power makes no sense, Acres and acres of land near large population centers are required to make solar even remotely affordable. Solar generated power is also very low in efficiency. The high cost of land basically eliminates solar as a mass source of power.
Ahh, recycling....What a bunch of crap. In some materials which are highly toxic when heated and on others where the recycling process creates unusable and dangerous byproducts, actually creates more of a mess and is more costly than simply manufacturing new..A couple of perspectives
What do we really know about recycling?
The Yale Free Press

I support recycling. Unfortunately, the way it's being done is the most profitable for the recycling company as opposed what it best for the environment. Solve that issue and public support will almost be universal.

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h9FLvj2ZJM&feature=player_embedded"]Solar Power Cheaper than Coal[/ame]

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

 

[Annie]

And NOBODY is saying we are going to get off our oil glut all in one fell swoop, but we aren't doing ANYTHING to move away from it. If we stopped using so much oil to power our vehicles, there would be MORE of it to use for the rest of our petroleum needs. If we used more wind and solar to produce our electricity needs, we would have more oil to use for other things. How many states still don't require recycling?

Wind generated power......This is very expensive. A friend of mine who works for a company that engineers and manufactures parts and components made of different metals. The firm just landed a contract with GE Energy Division. The contract is to build bearings and gears for wind turbines. The COST, not the retail price for each assembly is $150,000. That's just for the gear/bearings. The bottom line is wind turbines are very expensive. In fact they are cost prohibitive. Add in the rest of the components that make up the entire assembly, purchase of land, the infrastructure to carry the electricity to market and of course the NIMBY factor and we have one big fat bureaucratic boondoggle.
Solar generated power makes no sense, Acres and acres of land near large population centers are required to make solar even remotely affordable. Solar generated power is also very low in efficiency. The high cost of land basically eliminates solar as a mass source of power.
Ahh, recycling....What a bunch of crap. In some materials which are highly toxic when heated and on others where the recycling process creates unusable and dangerous byproducts, actually creates more of a mess and is more costly than simply manufacturing new..A couple of perspectives
What do we really know about recycling?
The Yale Free Press

I support recycling. Unfortunately, the way it's being done is the most profitable for the recycling company as opposed what it best for the environment. Solve that issue and public support will almost be universal.

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h9FLvj2ZJM&feature=player_embedded"]Solar Power Cheaper than Coal[/ame]

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

Wind power: Even worse than you thought ? The Register

Wind power: Even worse than you thought

But your 'leccy bill will keep going up to buy more of it

By Lewis Page

Posted in Environment, 7th April 2011 09:36 GMT


A new analysis of wind energy supplied to the UK National Grid in recent years has shown that wind farms produce significantly less electricity than had been thought, and that they cause more problems for the Grid than had been believed...

 

[Big Fitz]

And NOBODY is saying we are going to get off our oil glut all in one fell swoop, but we aren't doing ANYTHING to move away from it. If we stopped using so much oil to power our vehicles, there would be MORE of it to use for the rest of our petroleum needs. If we used more wind and solar to produce our electricity needs, we would have more oil to use for other things. How many states still don't require recycling?

Wind generated power......This is very expensive. A friend of mine who works for a company that engineers and manufactures parts and components made of different metals. The firm just landed a contract with GE Energy Division. The contract is to build bearings and gears for wind turbines. The COST, not the retail price for each assembly is $150,000. That's just for the gear/bearings. The bottom line is wind turbines are very expensive. In fact they are cost prohibitive. Add in the rest of the components that make up the entire assembly, purchase of land, the infrastructure to carry the electricity to market and of course the NIMBY factor and we have one big fat bureaucratic boondoggle.
Solar generated power makes no sense, Acres and acres of land near large population centers are required to make solar even remotely affordable. Solar generated power is also very low in efficiency. The high cost of land basically eliminates solar as a mass source of power.
Ahh, recycling....What a bunch of crap. In some materials which are highly toxic when heated and on others where the recycling process creates unusable and dangerous byproducts, actually creates more of a mess and is more costly than simply manufacturing new..A couple of perspectives
What do we really know about recycling?
The Yale Free Press

I support recycling. Unfortunately, the way it's being done is the most profitable for the recycling company as opposed what it best for the environment. Solve that issue and public support will almost be universal.

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h9FLvj2ZJM&feature=player_embedded"]Solar Power Cheaper than Coal[/ame]

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

End the subsidies and see how cheap it REALLY is for one. Let the market sort it out in an honest contest. Solar can't compete even with Lignite or possibly even Peat.

 

[Seawytch]

Wind generated power......This is very expensive. A friend of mine who works for a company that engineers and manufactures parts and components made of different metals. The firm just landed a contract with GE Energy Division. The contract is to build bearings and gears for wind turbines. The COST, not the retail price for each assembly is $150,000. That's just for the gear/bearings. The bottom line is wind turbines are very expensive. In fact they are cost prohibitive. Add in the rest of the components that make up the entire assembly, purchase of land, the infrastructure to carry the electricity to market and of course the NIMBY factor and we have one big fat bureaucratic boondoggle.
Solar generated power makes no sense, Acres and acres of land near large population centers are required to make solar even remotely affordable. Solar generated power is also very low in efficiency. The high cost of land basically eliminates solar as a mass source of power.
Ahh, recycling....What a bunch of crap. In some materials which are highly toxic when heated and on others where the recycling process creates unusable and dangerous byproducts, actually creates more of a mess and is more costly than simply manufacturing new..A couple of perspectives
What do we really know about recycling?
The Yale Free Press

I support recycling. Unfortunately, the way it's being done is the most profitable for the recycling company as opposed what it best for the environment. Solve that issue and public support will almost be universal.

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4h9FLvj2ZJM&feature=player_embedded"]Solar Power Cheaper than Coal[/ame]

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

End the subsidies and see how cheap it REALLY is for one. Let the market sort it out in an honest contest. Solar can't compete even with Lignite or possibly even Peat.

Fossil Fuels first...

 

[Annie]

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

Solar Power Cheaper than Coal

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

End the subsidies and see how cheap it REALLY is for one. Let the market sort it out in an honest contest. Solar can't compete even with Lignite or possibly even Peat.

Fossil Fuels first...

I'm of the opinion that we need to develop new sources of energy, they are not where they need to be, yet.

Using food for fuel is a very bad plan for all but the subsidized farmers.

Obama's wishing on the magic lamp that letting fuel prices go through the roof is going to make the perfect green solution with millions of jobs appear is not going to happen. What is if things don't turn around rather quickly is that the millions of underemployed people are not going to be able to get to their shitty jobs.

 

[KissMy]

I'm of the opinion that we need to develop new sources of energy, they are not where they need to be, yet.

Using food for fuel is a very bad plan for all but the subsidized farmers.

Farmers are not subsidized. The so called "Ethanol Subsidy" is nothing more than a 48 cent per gallon tax break for oil companies. It is actually a blender credit for them to sell ethanol in their gas pumps. Nothing gets paid to farmers or ethanol plants. Just a tax break for oil companies.

You can thank the ever weakening US Dollar for sending all our Corn, DDGs & Ethanol to foreign countries.

Ethanol Exports Continue to Surge; Anti-Dumping Investigation Reduces DDGS Exports to China

The new year began with a bang for U.S. ethanol exports, according to government data released today. Ethanol shipments (consisting of both denatured and undenatured, non-beverage, ethanol) totaled 57.2 million gallons in January, marking the second highest monthly total on record. However, the January total was down 20% from the all-time record of 71.9 million gallons. established in December 2010. These exports are not eligible for the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC), also called the blender’s credit.

Of the total, 45.4 million gallons were denatured. Canada continued to be the top market for denatured ethanol exports, receiving 19.4 million gallons in January. The United Arab Emirates, the Netherlands, Finland, and the United Kingdom, respectively, were other top destinations for denatured product in January. Together, the top five importers received 98% of total U.S. denatured ethanol shipments in January.

The U.S. exported 11.8 million gallons of undenatured ethanol in January, with about half of that total going to Nigeria. The Netherlands and Mexico were the second- and third-leading importers in January. Together, the three countries received 97% of total undenatured ethanol exports in January.

At 714,000 metric tons, January exports of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) were virtually identical to December 2010 levels (713,600 metric tons). Exports to China—the leading export market in 2010—fell by 30% in January, likely as the result of China’s DDGS anti-dumping investigation. January exports to China totaled 129,000 metric tons, down from 183,000 metric tons in December 2010. However, the drop in exports to China was offset by a surge in exports to Mexico. DDGS exports to Mexico jumped from 130,000 metric tons in December to 229,000 metric tons in January, a 76% increase.

Following Mexico and China, Canada was the third-leading market for DDGS exports in January, receiving 87,000 metric tons.

Another large driver of food prices are the many millions of 2012 doomers stocking up enormous stockpiles of food. There are even large corporations storing food for members. Survival cities have been built & are being stocked full of food. 2012 fear is a very big & booming world wide business.

 

[Big Fitz]

Wind power cheaper than nuclear, says EU climate chief

Solar Power Cheaper than Coal

I'm sorry, but I'm just not getting your logic regarding recycling. You think that if it were better for the environment, more people would do it?

Isn't ANY kind of recycling better than clogging landfills?

Let's try subsidizing renewable energy the way we subsidize fossil fuels....oops, if we did that we wouldn't be dependent upon fossil fuels. The corporate overlords would never allow THAT kind of freedom.

End the subsidies and see how cheap it REALLY is for one. Let the market sort it out in an honest contest. Solar can't compete even with Lignite or possibly even Peat.

Fossil Fuels first...

I've no problem with that. Petroleum has been the best power source outside of Nuclear and Hydroelectric since its discovery. Even before the crazed taxation/subsidy insanity of the modern era.

Since Solar energy has NEVER been off the gubmint tit, it's cost will only go to unsustainable level. Maybe in a century when the technology finally improves it'll be viable for something OTHER than supplemental occasional light power uses.

 

[Seawytch]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

 

[Annie]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

When the electric cars are developed and the price becomes affordable and the grid is built to sustain the density of New York, LA, Chicago, it may be viable. It shouldn't be the government though.

I am still waiting for hydrogen powered cars. Clean and doable. I know BP was working on establishing test station for CA.

 

[Seawytch]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

When the electric cars are developed and the price becomes affordable and the grid is built to sustain the density of New York, LA, Chicago, it may be viable. It shouldn't be the government though.

I am still waiting for hydrogen powered cars. Clean and doable. I know BP was working on establishing test station for CA.

We aren't going to be able to build that grid without the government. Oil certainly didn't get where it is today without subsidies from the government (we still do subsidize them heavily). The government built the roads for the oil burning cars to drive on. I recall that as a time of economic prosperity when we invested in our infrastructure...hmmm

 

[Annie]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

When the electric cars are developed and the price becomes affordable and the grid is built to sustain the density of New York, LA, Chicago, it may be viable. It shouldn't be the government though.

I am still waiting for hydrogen powered cars. Clean and doable. I know BP was working on establishing test station for CA.

We aren't going to be able to build that grid without the government. Oil certainly didn't get where it is today without subsidies from the government (we still do subsidize them heavily). The government built the roads for the oil burning cars to drive on. I recall that as a time of economic prosperity when we invested in our infrastructure...hmmm

The electric companies and the auto companies would have huge reasons to join forces and do what is needed. The government helped build the interstate highway system, which added greatly to the problems you've spent pages bitching about.

 

[uscitizen]

OIl has about gotten high enough to promote more drilling.

 

[Big Fitz]

OIl has about gotten high enough to promote more drilling.

Shit. It's been that way for decades. If it weren't for the eco-nazis and EPAFascists we'd still be at LEAST as energy independent as we were before the abyssmal failure of Carter's Dept. Of Energy (which needs to be abolished.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I'm of the opinion that we need to develop new sources of energy, they are not where they need to be, yet.

Using food for fuel is a very bad plan for all but the subsidized farmers.

Farmers are not subsidized. The so called "Ethanol Subsidy" is nothing more than a 48 cent per gallon tax break for oil companies. It is actually a blender credit for them to sell ethanol in their gas pumps. Nothing gets paid to farmers or ethanol plants. Just a tax break for oil companies.

You can thank the ever weakening US Dollar for sending all our Corn, DDGs & Ethanol to foreign countries.

Ethanol Exports Continue to Surge; Anti-Dumping Investigation Reduces DDGS Exports to China

The new year began with a bang for U.S. ethanol exports, according to government data released today. Ethanol shipments (consisting of both denatured and undenatured, non-beverage, ethanol) totaled 57.2 million gallons in January, marking the second highest monthly total on record. However, the January total was down 20% from the all-time record of 71.9 million gallons. established in December 2010. These exports are not eligible for the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC), also called the blender’s credit.

Of the total, 45.4 million gallons were denatured. Canada continued to be the top market for denatured ethanol exports, receiving 19.4 million gallons in January. The United Arab Emirates, the Netherlands, Finland, and the United Kingdom, respectively, were other top destinations for denatured product in January. Together, the top five importers received 98% of total U.S. denatured ethanol shipments in January.

The U.S. exported 11.8 million gallons of undenatured ethanol in January, with about half of that total going to Nigeria. The Netherlands and Mexico were the second- and third-leading importers in January. Together, the three countries received 97% of total undenatured ethanol exports in January.

At 714,000 metric tons, January exports of distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) were virtually identical to December 2010 levels (713,600 metric tons). Exports to China—the leading export market in 2010—fell by 30% in January, likely as the result of China’s DDGS anti-dumping investigation. January exports to China totaled 129,000 metric tons, down from 183,000 metric tons in December 2010. However, the drop in exports to China was offset by a surge in exports to Mexico. DDGS exports to Mexico jumped from 130,000 metric tons in December to 229,000 metric tons in January, a 76% increase.

Following Mexico and China, Canada was the third-leading market for DDGS exports in January, receiving 87,000 metric tons.

Another large driver of food prices are the many millions of 2012 doomers stocking up enormous stockpiles of food. There are even large corporations storing food for members. Survival cities have been built & are being stocked full of food. 2012 fear is a very big & booming world wide business.

please with the fuckin conspiracy shit.....

 

[thereisnospoon]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

Pie in the sky nonsense. Anyone contracted to do a study by the people who have an interest in the results of said study can come up with results favorable to that entity.
The bottom line is the current electrical grid cannot sustain the needs of massive numbers of electric powered vehicles. Not only that, the power systems required to satisfy the needs of American drivers without restricting their freedom( very important issue there) do not exist, nor does the technology. Electricity is not the future of motive power.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

When the electric cars are developed and the price becomes affordable and the grid is built to sustain the density of New York, LA, Chicago, it may be viable. It shouldn't be the government though.

I am still waiting for hydrogen powered cars. Clean and doable. I know BP was working on establishing test station for CA.

We aren't going to be able to build that grid without the government. Oil certainly didn't get where it is today without subsidies from the government (we still do subsidize them heavily). The government built the roads for the oil burning cars to drive on. I recall that as a time of economic prosperity when we invested in our infrastructure...hmmm

Then the cost in taxation to pay for the subsidies becomes prohibitive. This in effect restricts our freedom. The freedom to travel as we see fit. Additionally industries tied ot travel and tourism would literally bleed jobs to the point of death. In fact discretionary income would become a part of history. High taxes lower the standard of living for all.
Is that the kind of world you wish to live in? I would suspect the majority of us would say HELL FREAKING NO!!!!

 

[Big Fitz]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

Till they can produce an electric car that can:

1. Get 300 miles to the charge
2. Get that mileage while running the heater/AC, radio and headlights at the same time (winter in MN remember, sucks for batteries)
3. Fully charge in 5 minutes
4. Be as cheap as an internal combustion engine.
5. Tow a trailer and get similar mileage to the internal combustion engine.

it will not succeed in this nation. Period.

Also. You cannot conserve your way out of an energy crisis. You can only give yourself more time in which to develop WORKABLE solutions. Since Pinwheels, Mirrors and moonshine are at best half a century away from practicality... you have more time to develop more carbon based energy sources to meet your needs or begin cultural decline.

 

[uscitizen]

The stock market is doing great, therefore America is too.

 

[Ame®icano]

I pay 8.35$ a liter out here on Ascension. A LITER, not Gallon (for the non college grads).


Americans are cry babies when it comes to Guz. Grow up! the rest of the world pays a lot more, and guess what. Its now our turn.


Most of you have no idea how good we have it, sort of depressing really.

You're getting your oil from the same place we do.

Difference is what your government takes in thru taxes.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Something we can be doing while exploring other alternatives...

Savings Will Lure Americans To Electric Cars
TRANSCRIPT
[...]

And when you actually look at Melbourne all the way Brisbane - Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane with Cambria in the middle - you realize that's as long as the entire West Coast of the United States. And once you can do the southeast coast of Australia, you can do the West Coast. You can do the East Coast of the United States. You can cover the entire country.

The cost of infrastructure to cover the entire United States with enough coverage for everybody to drive from anywhere-to-anywhere, would be in the range of about $8 billion, which is the equivalence of seven days of gasoline used by the drivers today in the country.
INSKEEP: You're saying $8 billion, that's the investment you would need if your charging stations and other infrastructures were to be all across the United States - available across the United States.

Mr. AGASSI: That's right. We use $1.2 billion to drive today. We buy $1.2 billion worth of miles, if you want, in the form of gallons and gas stations. Take seven days of that, you get $8 billion. And we can put a switch station to cover the entire country. Everywhere you would go, you would have corridors where you'll be able to drive an electric car from one corner to another corner of the country.

As a country, we aren't even taking baby steps away from our addiction to oil...but that's what happens when the corporations that are making HUGE profits off of fossil fuels own our elected representatives.

Till they can produce an electric car that can:

1. Get 300 miles to the charge
2. Get that mileage while running the heater/AC, radio and headlights at the same time (winter in MN remember, sucks for batteries)
3. Fully charge in 5 minutes
4. Be as cheap as an internal combustion engine.
5. Tow a trailer and get similar mileage to the internal combustion engine.

it will not succeed in this nation. Period.

Also. You cannot conserve your way out of an energy crisis. You can only give yourself more time in which to develop WORKABLE solutions. Since Pinwheels, Mirrors and moonshine are at best half a century away from practicality... you have more time to develop more carbon based energy sources to meet your needs or begin cultural decline.

The technology exists for all of this, and it'll become cheaper with time. Already there are fully electric cars that significantly outperform gas engines.

It's only a matter of time until it's financially feasible.