Science Chic wrote: Doesn't matter which one wins. The economy is going to continue to stagnate, we will bear increasing debt as we continue to pay for increasingly frequent and more severe natural disasters, and all politicians will continue to stick their head in the sand denying it and putting off effective measures to mitigate more extensive damage down the road thanks to their unwavering corrupt support of fossil fuel energy and the status quo.
We're all hosed. I don't even think Jill Stein has a prayer of making anything happen.
Wow SC, I never heard you so down and negative before. You used to be the shining light of positive optimism on here? Sniff sniff. Cheer up and have a glass of wine! :party
LOL
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
Don't tell SC. Romney declared his energy policy. Very specific. Drill baby drill. We will drill onshore. We will drill offshore. No more dependence on the Middle East.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Well if anyone wants to really tackle CO2, pollution and energy independence long term, you would need to go step by step.
Efficiency
Natural Gas
Nuclear
and long term a breakthrough in Fusion or something else.
And of course drill for what oil we need at home, oil is used in a lot of products from plastic to tires to asphalt, and much more.
Solar and Wind will never power the whole electrical grid - too variable, 30% would be huge. And China and India will cancel out whatever we save anyway. 30% electric cars would be huge too. We still will be using oil in 50 years.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
Science Chic wrote: Doesn't matter which one wins. The economy is going to continue to stagnate, we will bear increasing debt as we continue to pay for increasingly frequent and more severe natural disasters, and all politicians will continue to stick their head in the sand denying it and putting off effective measures to mitigate more extensive damage down the road thanks to their unwavering corrupt support of fossil fuel energy and the status quo.
We're all hosed. I don't even think Jill Stein has a prayer of making anything happen.
Wow SC, I never heard you so down and negative before. You used to be the shining light of Optimism on here. Sniff sniff. Cheer up and have a glass of wine! :party
LOL
lol That's part of my problem - I have so much to do that I can't afford to drink and it's causing problems! I brought a bottle to last night's 285 Tourism Meeting to celebrate our success at the Carnation Festival this past weekend promoting tourism to the corridor to help boost our local economy, came home, sat down to watch a little TV with hubby before getting back to it and crashed. :faint: No more wine til I get caught up (or at least not so far behind on high-priority items) - it kills my night-time productivity.
FredHayek wrote: Don't tell SC. Romney declared his energy policy. Very specific. Drill baby drill. We will drill onshore. We will drill offshore. No more dependence on the Middle East.
Then he's a dumbass idiot who will ruin our economy irrevocably and it won't get us off our Middle East dependence anyway - there's not enough fossil fuels here in the US to support our burgeoning consumption and they'd price us right out of the market to boot for our efforts.
How many more billions do you guys think we have to continue fighting forest fires that are only going to get worse due to the drought and heat? How much money do you have to pay for food costs that will increase due to crop failures? When sea levels continue to rise and coastal cities start becoming flooded even without hurricanes to push the water in, and then hurricanes do come and effect more damage further inland than they've ever done before, how long until we run out of money to continue cleaning up and rebuilding (and paying for insurance costs), or just abandoning whole areas? This is our children's future unless we get off the fossil fuel teat, and soon. Ignore it if you want cuz it's a big, scary, ugly problem with no easy solutions, but I'm not voting for any moron who keeps moving us backwards.
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Thanks LOL, I'll try not to (although that's just my nature). Vaca weekend in October to Seattle for a good friend's wedding - Washington Wine Country here I come! :woo hoo: Money in wallet, there it goes. lol
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
FredHayek wrote: Don't tell SC. Romney declared his energy policy. Very specific. Drill baby drill. We will drill onshore. We will drill offshore. No more dependence on the Middle East.
Drill, Baby, Drill? It Won’t Necessarily Pay, Baby, Pay
Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney continually faults President Barack Obama for not allowing more oil and gas drilling in the U.S., saying he's leaving money on the table in the midst of an energy boom.
A new report shows that claim comes up a bit short.
The Congressional Budget Office found the potential revenue from expanded offshore and onshore drilling may be less of a budgetary boon than lawmakers hope. Immediately opening most federal lands to oil and gas leasing, including Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, would yield about $7 billion in additional receipts over the next 10 years, according to CBO. Much of that money would flow not to the U.S. Treasury but to the state of Alaska.
Take ANWR, which is estimated to contain about 8 percent of the nation's undiscovered oil. CBO says opening the area to oil and gas drilling would result in about $5 billion in additional receipts over the next 10 years and gross royalties could total $25 billion to $50 billion in the following decade, depending on a series of unknowable factors. Under current legislative proposals to open ANWR, about 90 percent of that money would flow back to Alaska.
Won't flow to US treasury coffers? Maybe but it will create many more good paying jobs than shuttered solar and wind energy plants. The alternative energy jobs building solar panels and windmills went to China. Oil and gas field jobs stay here.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
They won't ever get it Fred, we have already gone from 60% imports to 40% today. I say keep drilling and import even less, create jobs here and keep after efficiency and new technology at the same time. All of the above!
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.