Whats going to happen!!!!

Discussion in 'Mid Atlantic' started by fupafest, Jun 18, 2010.

  1. bennysgohome

    bennysgohome Well-Known Member

    Nov 13, 2009
    Solar can power electric cars. The problem is the price of solar which big oil companies keep high thru lobbying. This is a time when govt has to step in and bring down the price of solar. They should require mandates at the state level to have solar power plants or wind. Eventually, we could get clean energy if we have a good adminitration, but I've been waiting for 35 years for a good/honest/non-corrupt President.

    The eyewitness accounts tell the whole story about the responsibility of BP and their negligence. People have actually died here and workers warned BP management weeks before the explosion that the riser was leaking due to not using cement. It's also ironic that Goldman Sachs, whose former chairman is a BP man, and Tony Hayward both dumped all the shares when the riser started leaking weeks before the explosion. Don't tell me you think that's just good luck? They knew they should have used mud instead of sea water and that there was going to be a disaster. Come on. Just do some research but not by watching main stream media. That's like spraying black paint in your eyes.

    There are some good documentaries. Black Wave about the Exxon Valdez is really disturbing. It is strangely similiar to the current disaster. Exxon hired people people off the streets to wash rocks that just got tainted after the next wave of oil. This is the best a billion dollar company can do. They had the workers use methods like BP today. Now all the workers have respirtory issues, brain damage, and nervous system problems. This happened because of the oil fumes and guess what the dispersants used. The good old EPA approved these dispersants which are now considered toxic and cause cancer. Exxon and the EPA actually told people it was fine to swim in water that contained the dispersants and eat fish in that area too. There are several workers and fisherman sick from this cleanup and the dispersants. Now, the EPA finally banned that dispersant, but is using another one this time around.

    As you see workers are getting sick again during this oil spill too and we will see this horrible problem repeat itself. These oil companies only care about PR, saving face and will do everything in their power to hide the truth. Keep in mind that Haliburton helped use the sea water instead of the mud which caused this diaster and they also are vested heavily in the cleanup company that BP uses. Something isn't right here.
     
  2. Recycled Surfer

    Recycled Surfer Well-Known Member

    488
    Jan 1, 2010
    Sad to say but the truth is the GM EV-1 was a true turd. I know one of the people who were involved in the R&D of that vehicle. He still laughs at the PR they put out on that car. GM knew it was a loser half way into the project but their mentality was it was "Doomed to succeed. Thats not to say with current technology we cant develop a electric car that can be partially charged with solar power. But don't think its gonna be fast or go long distances or have a ton of options cause all those extras need power too. Bush can be blamed for some stuff but not the demise of the EV-1. :D
     

  3. Mitchell

    Mitchell Well-Known Member

    Jan 5, 2009
    wow..i consider myself a bit left of center, but i dont think the government has the power (or even the responsibility) to step in and bring down the price of anything. I mean subsidies (research, utility construction grants, etc.) are really the only way to do that, so the price isnt really lower, just disguised. I also dont really want the federal govt mandating that state or local power should be generated by wind or solar. What evidence is there that the Federal government knows any better what is best for us than the states do?
     
  4. BonerSurfs

    BonerSurfs Well-Known Member

    504
    Apr 14, 2007
    Sadly, your right. The energy that would power these electric cars would mostly come from burning coal. Its a sad fact.

    However, i disagree with nuclear plants being the only solution. Wind power and Solar power need to be taken more seriously. In the winter, I live in Steamboat Springs, and all of the chair lifts there are powered by 1 wind power generator. Eventually the whole town will be run on wind and solar. But I do admit that as of right now, the town is powered by a large coal burning plant.

    Another energy source a lot of people don't know about is Plasma. I think in the future most of our energy will come from plasma. Its crazy efficient and very very clean. I couldn't tell you how its different from nuclear, because nuclear plants use plasma. But I do know that a "Plasma Plant" produces no radiation.
     
  5. BonerSurfs

    BonerSurfs Well-Known Member

    504
    Apr 14, 2007
    Wow I didn't know that... It just keeps getting worse and worse... I knew big wigs were profiting off this...
     
  6. bennysgohome

    bennysgohome Well-Known Member

    Nov 13, 2009
    I think government has to get the ball rolling with solar. I am usually a limited govt person. It's just a tough area and something has to be done. Big oil has too much power and can influence other companies (including solar companies) using their money. I do believe in free markets and for government to stay out of it, but this issue is perplexing. We have to get off our dependence on oil. We should be using something like the sun which won't deplete our natural resources and doesn't pollute our land, water, and air.

    Something has to take us off oil. Several other deep water wells by BP were built with the same errors as this current well. This means we are likely to have another similiar spill. I don't know about others, but I don't feel like living in a world where all our oceans and waters are oil slicks.

    We should just import our oil instead of offshore drilling and if prices go up, so be it. Then, people will look to alternative solutions and prices will drop based on demand.
     
  7. bennysgohome

    bennysgohome Well-Known Member

    Nov 13, 2009
    I got ahead of myself about gettin the feds involved. I do also agree that things should be on the state level to keep the balance of the fed govt in check. Coastal states should get involved with providing grants for R&D. It would be even better if citizens put together an organization in our state to help with R&D of solar/wind power and other methods to make it more affordable. I would donate money to that type of organization.
     
  8. aka pumpmaster

    aka pumpmaster Well-Known Member

    Apr 30, 2008
    Fusion is the way to go if we can ever get it to work. I'm all for solar and wind but some people still get bent out of shape about that!! Just look at the wind farm off marthas vineyard. People got bent out of shape because it 'ruined the view'!
     
  9. jwj72

    jwj72 Active Member

    39
    Apr 2, 2007
    Yeah, and they were the same people (Robert Kennedy, Jr) promoting it everywhere else. At least be consistent with your point of view, not what's good for you isn't good for me. There are a lot of hypocrites in the green movement and I think that's one of the big turn offs about some of the alternate forms of power. If these are the experts and promoters and it's not good enough for them, why should the rest of us pay tons of money to make it happen and have to live with it. Personally, I'd love to put solar panels and windmills on my house to lower my bills, but it's not cost effective at this point and I'm not made of money.
     
  10. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    Good points. Energy isn't easy. Nuclear power plants *can* be dicey as well if management and operation, including construction, aren't anal to the nth degree. It is the old dilemma of exponential risk. Makes you wonder in light of the Deepwater Horizon fiasco whether anyone would want a new nuclear plan in their backyard unless an idiot proof plant can be built.

    Increased electric-powered cars and natural gas-fueled trucks isn't so far fetched. The electrical grid already needs upgrading. In the bigger scheme of things it wouldn't be such a bad idea to invest $10B/yr in R&D and starter projects. Consider that DOD has spent between $70B to $80B annually the last decade, a small allocation of $10B for our national energy security would be well spent.
     
  11. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    The evidenciary chain is quite long. Just can't expect the Federal government to always be correct. Of course, in these discussions it can be somewhat challenging to define the "Federal government" or the Government of the USA... do you mean the political component or the civil service component? Do you mean the executive branch, embodied in the President, or the Congress or the Supreme Court? The correct choice also depends upon one's philosophical or ideological perspective.

    Back to the Federal government making choices: EPA; CAFE standards for cars and now trucks; tax credits for alternative energy sources, or better yet, for energy efficiency (new furnaces, windows, insulation... the consumer makes choices in the marketplace). Nonetheless, some new technologies require significant gov't investment to get underway (computer technology, nuclear energy).

    There are also plenty examples of poor implementations, such as the MMS, the initial administrator of which was Secretary of the Interior James G. Watt, beginning a long period of regulatory capture.
     
  12. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    Don't let the NIMBYs dampen your enthusiasm... others' opinions on the Swell Info forums never gets in your way!
     
  13. spongedude

    spongedude Well-Known Member

    301
    Feb 28, 2010
    apples and pineapples

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/washington/15bridge.html

    actually, a poor analogy. the bridge was good for 40 years, but the amount of weight that was added over the years, as well as fatigue, did it in. the design wasn't intended for what the bridge eventually morphed into....like the tower of pisa...a succession of small errors.... i can't say i see the correlation to blatant disregard for safety and potential for disaster in the name of expediency and profit that BP exhibited....
    and indeed if the DOT in those last years knew the likely outcome and made a calculated decision to take the risk, yes they should be prosecuted.....it's why they get paid the big bucks

    a better analogy would be ford's treatment of the pinto gas tank problem or toyota's attempt to overlook the brake/acceleration issues....they KNEW there was a problem and chose to risk the lawsuits/losses because they estimated it would be cheaper
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2010
  14. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    Come to think of it, electric vehicles are being widely used in Florida. There are entire communities where families own two vehicles, one being a conventional gasoline powered car and the other being an electric vehicle aka golf cart. These carts have regular parking spaces at shopping centers, grocery stores, and other facilities and are used to get around all over the place. The electrical grid has not collapsed!
     
  15. aka pumpmaster

    aka pumpmaster Well-Known Member

    Apr 30, 2008
    I could see that in some isolated cases, but most people couldn't afford that set up.
     
  16. jwj72

    jwj72 Active Member

    39
    Apr 2, 2007
    The analogy wasn't directly to the problem, but to those calling for death of BP folks. And again, you're jumping to the conclusion that whoever made these calls knew that people would die and the Gulf would be polluted to this level. We've been deep water drilling for some time (about 25 years and 5000 to 10000 wells from what I can find), too, even with this same rig without any issues, so I dont' see how your 40 years makes any difference. Either way, DOT has the responsibility of maintaining that bridge, so someone was making a call that it would be okay by omission if nothing else. My question was, should those folks also be subject to death? I was trying to point out how ridiculous the death statements are and that people need to use their heads for more than wearing hats. It's okay to get angry, but don't let your emotions make decisions instead of your intellect. That will only get you in trouble.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2010
  17. aka pumpmaster

    aka pumpmaster Well-Known Member

    Apr 30, 2008
    You'll find that alot of people are all talk and no action. How many of you 'sky is falling' types donated to the CNN telethon last night?
     
  18. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    For a family that would otherwise own two gas powered conventional automobiles it can be a real option - it does take a change in mindset and also helps to live in a neighborhood or village setting. If commuting a short distance to work is the issue then several of the small cars are options. You save on investment and operating costs.
     
  19. aka pumpmaster

    aka pumpmaster Well-Known Member

    Apr 30, 2008
    ah yes but what about that pesky issue of all those highly toxic batteries?
     
  20. rodndtube

    rodndtube Well-Known Member

    800
    May 21, 2006
    Many parts of an automobile are highly toxic and the overall footprint of a conventional gasoline-powered automobile is much larger. Sure beats sending USD overseas to Saudi Arabia, Venezuela...