So the truth comes out. It's all about winning an arguement. All you really want is the knuckledraggers and flatearthers to fall in line and recognize your superior intellect. Afterall... "I'm a college graduate". All scientists are college graduates, and there are millions of them. So you believe that if you get about 400 of them that are all paid by George Soros, The Center for American Progress, or any other liberal thinktank with a DBA... we can change the world. My daughter use to love watching Pinky and the Brain. That's you.

 

Now if we buy into your doomsday scenario that humans are causing the planet to die, we must first blame the people who caused humans to kill the planet. The scientists are the scumbags that are killing Mother Earth. Because of scientists we have cars, trucks, planes, 100 story skyscrapers, space travel, and the internet. Because of scientists we have cures for disease, mass food production, and weapons of mass destruction. After WWII, we found a new appreciation for life and stopped killing off millions every year in wars.

 

Since you're too afraid to say what your solution is... I'll have to say it for you. You want us to go back to living like primates, and like you said, it won't do anything... or we need to kill off about 4 billion people... and I say... NO!

 

So instead of just living our lives in peace... you want to get into an intellectual pissing contest.

So the truth comes out. It's all about winning an arguement. All you really want is the knuckledraggers and flatearthers to fall in line and recognize your superior intellect. Afterall... "I'm a college graduate". All scientists are college graduates, and there are millions of them. So you believe that if you get about 400 of them that are all paid by George Soros, The Center for American Progress, or any other liberal thinktank with a DBA... we can change the world. My daughter use to love watching Pinky and the Brain. That's you.

 

Now if we buy into your doomsday scenario that humans are causing the planet to die, we must first blame the people who caused humans to kill the planet. The scientists are the scumbags that are killing Mother Earth. Because of scientists we have cars, trucks, planes, 100 story skyscrapers, space travel, and the internet. Because of scientists we have cures for disease, mass food production, and weapons of mass destruction. After WWII, we found a new appreciation for life and stopped killing off millions every year in wars.

 

Since you're too afraid to say what your solution is... I'll have to say it for you. You want us to go back to living like primates, and like you said, it won't do anything... or we need to kill off about 4 billion people... and I say... NO!

 

So instead of just living our lives in peace... you want to get into an intellectual pissing contest.

Yeah, we can't go back. But there are inefficiencies that we can get rid of.

 

First is, as always, the ridiculous Western diet of meat-at-every-meal. I don't see a lot of climatologists turning vegetarian like they should if they truly behaved like we were in trouble. I eat meat because it has nutritional value not available in veggies, but I go days without eating it. Most meat vitamins are fat soluble, which means your body can store them very well and doesn't need access to them as often. Easy solution? Cut subsidies to ranchers and dairy farmers. All subsidies, whether monetary, feed, or water. Let the market price the meat as it should be priced. That will force people to treat it as the rarity it always was and should be.

 

Next is an increase in research on and laws built for truly automated cars and drones. This will allow mass transportation that is both individual and public. Most people will leave their inefficient egomobiles in the garage during daily travel. These mass cars can more easily be converted to natural gas & electric, cutting carbon emissions. Drones are even better. Instead of a vehicle lugging around a 200-lb meat sack everywhere to buy things, people can have goods shipped directly to themselves with only the weight of the goods themselves needing transport.

 

Finally, allow mining of rare earths in California. China is a hotbed for solar technology because they're the only country that has legal access to rare earths used in solar panels. California has many of the same minerals, but refuses to let them be mined for environmental reason, which could easily be mitigated.

 

P.S. Get rid of subsidized recycling. Aluminum and other metals are the only materials worth reusing. Paper, plastic, etc. takes more energy to recycle than it does to produce fresh. If you don't believe me, watch Penn & Teller's show "BullShit" and its episode on recycling.

See this up here?^^^ This is a guy who actually thinks.

Notice the absence of "You're blinded by your inferior exsistance... I'm so intelligent, you just can't understand".

See this up here?^^^ This is a guy who actually thinks.

Notice the absence of "You're blinded by your inferior exsistance... I'm so intelligent, you just can't understand".

I generally don't state the obvious. 

 

http://i.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/photoshop/1/4/6/426146_v1.gif

Zacch, you shouldn't dislike the american right for their ignorance in science, but for their blindfull hope in a capitalistic utopia.

 

Lys throws out the excellent excuse of scientists making all the shit thats currently fucking over our planet. Well grats, "the scientists" made it, strangly enough they didn't made it for personal amusement but for personal enrichment (and usually not there own person thats getting "enriched").

 

Scientists made the atom-bomb, but I don't think we should blame them for irridiating half the pacific, think that some people slugging around in a mathemical 5 side figure are to blame for that >_>

 

1 trick ponies don't excist, there is no "cure-all" magix potion, neither is there 1 culprit who actually got us into this mess in the first place (or perhaps there is, lets blame the fellow who first used fire, blame the cavemen!). Duderonomy has nice tips and tricks to work with, but such tricks work when combined with legislation. Legislation is the brick to swing at people being counter-society, you know, those narcisists that usually speak more then actually do stuff themselfes.

Zacch, you shouldn't dislike the american right for their ignorance in science, but for their blindfull hope in a capitalistic utopia.

 

Lys throws out the excellent excuse of scientists making all the shit thats currently fucking over our planet. Well grats, "the scientists" made it, strangly enough they didn't made it for personal amusement but for personal enrichment (and usually not there own person thats getting "enriched").

 

Scientists made the atom-bomb, but I don't think we should blame them for irridiating half the pacific, think that some people slugging around in a mathemical 5 side figure are to blame for that >_>

 

1 trick ponies don't excist, there is no "cure-all" magix potion, neither is there 1 culprit who actually got us into this mess in the first place (or perhaps there is, lets blame the fellow who first used fire, blame the cavemen!). Duderonomy has nice tips and tricks to work with, but such tricks work when combined with legislation. Legislation is the brick to swing at people being counter-society, you know, those narcisists that usually speak more then actually do stuff themselfes.

Yeah, like Al Gore. Them mansions and them plane flights around the world ain't carbon neutral. No matter how many fraudulent "credits" he buys.

 

What I gave were a few examples where technology and policy can help. You're right in that there is no "single" fix, but at the same time, no one should call for a reversion to Stone Age tech, and we should be careful with limiting people's choice, since that almost always encourages antisocial behavior (look at the Drug War). Better to invest in technology or policies that encourage good behavior.

 

I can't speak for the entire world, but the U.S. is NOT a purely free market system, nor should it be. There are massive subsidies for food, water, and energy that are a big cause for overdevelopment and environmental destruction. While I agree with subsidizing and accepting the environmental damages for electrical transmission and product pipelines, actual generators and petroleum producers get tons of money through industry-specific tax breaks. Make electricity and petroleum more costly, and people will treat it with greater care. Same with the ridiculously low rates for water. Diverting water works on a limited basis, but it's better long-term to limit an area's water use to its rainfall. That's best done by graduated pricing (aka your first 100 gallons of a month can be subsidized, but the next 100 should be priced correctly). Don't even get me started on farming. Sure, subsidize certain crops that are essential for human health, but the corn and grain subsidies get ridiculous, especially in areas with low rainfall.

 

People make a big deal about GMO crops and corporate farms, but those are more energy efficient than family farms. I know there's a "wholesome" country mythos around the organic family farm, but we also romanticized horses and found them a necessity at one point in time. Didn't mean that we held onto them when something better came along.

 

The trend towards city living will actually save a lot of environmental damage. Same with a focus on electronic entertainment.

well the stone age people can go life with the libertarians, all on there own island

 

advancements are to be made will we desire to keep our humanity's main survival trait: empathy. but getting the next super-fix doesn't mean it will be used. Heck the electrical car has been here for LONGER then the petrol powered one. Sometimes stuff needs to be thought thruw not in months but decades.

• PLANT TREES!

More plants than animals can help keep the climate cool. 

• Stop using/throwing away plastic. 

Have you guys seen what that crap is doing to our oceans? It kills everything. 

• Stop having so many kids

Guide reproduction wisely. There are finite limits to the Earth that we have clearly met already.

• Clean energy

We can't rely on oil forever. Nuclear is a dumb idea if you ask me. The sun has unlimited energy if anyone can figure that one out.

• Find a way to stop this.

Otherwise, we really are fucked.

well the stone age people can go life with the libertarians, all on there own island

 

advancements are to be made will we desire to keep our humanity's main survival trait: empathy. but getting the next super-fix doesn't mean it will be used. Heck the electrical car has been here for LONGER then the petrol powered one. Sometimes stuff needs to be thought thruw not in months but decades.

Main problems with the electric car are these: 1. Length of trip 2. Speed of charge 3. Cost in materials and energy of batteries. One of the few cases where we are using some of the most efficient technology already, which is reflected in the market cost. We could save a lot in switching to natural gas, but it'd probably be better to hold off for electric. These problems could be eliminated by automated cars and car sharing. Only really far-ranging trips outside of populated areas would need fossil fuels at that point.

 

 

• PLANT TREES!

More plants than animals can help keep the climate cool. 

• Stop using/throwing away plastic. 

Have you guys seen what that crap is doing to our oceans? It kills everything. 

• Stop having so many kids

Guide reproduction wisely. There are finite limits to the Earth that we have clearly met already.

• Clean energy

We can't rely on oil forever. Nuclear is a dumb idea if you ask me. The sun has unlimited energy if anyone can figure that one out.

• Find a way to stop this.

Otherwise, we really are fucked.

 

Planting trees isn't the end-all solution. Not every habitat needs more trees, and the last thing we should be doing is watering & fertilizing forests that shouldn't be there. While we should be more careful with the trees we are using (if you see someone bragging about mahogany, please shit on them and their furniture immediately), most tree products are from fast-growth forests. Oh, and please use the rough, cheap toilet paper. Fluffy TP comes from old growth forest. The rough stuff is fast growth wood.

 

Plastic is, unfortunately, the best "cheap" material we have. While there are a lot of uses that could be eliminated (grocery bags), it's an easy-to-sanitize material that makes durable goods. No getting around it for medical use or children/pet products. Same with electronics. There are ways to deal with it, but the most important thing is to not litter. Yes, I'm talking about you, you damn teenager throwing your crap in my yard. I will fucking beat you with a five-inch switch. I may be possibly becoming a bitter old man. So maybe we could focus education on littering, rather than useless recycling.

 

Fewer kids are largely happening naturally, although government should stop funding any sexual education that is anti birth control. Europe, China, and Japan are already shrinking. The U.S. would be shrinking without immigration. Africa, South America, and the rest of Asia would follow if governments stopped using religious dogma for policy decisions. Also, government should not subsidize low-income families, except with food stamps. Distribute condoms and make abortions free.

 

Arctic methane release is uncontrollable. We have to hope there's a natural mechanism to prevent it, or just deal with the consequences.

 

• PLANT TREES!

More plants than animals can help keep the climate cool. 

• Stop using/throwing away plastic. 

Have you guys seen what that crap is doing to our oceans? It kills everything. 

• Stop having so many kids

Guide reproduction wisely. There are finite limits to the Earth that we have clearly met already.

• Clean energy

We can't rely on oil forever. Nuclear is a dumb idea if you ask me. The sun has unlimited energy if anyone can figure that one out.

• Find a way to stop this.

Otherwise, we really are fucked.

 

=> just tree's won't help, you need to get people to actually not cut them down 20y later >_>

=> or more usage of bio-degradable or recycled plastic. Perhaps stop using 5 foils to wrap each thin individually, dua-ly, in packs, on a pallet, ...

=> with more wealth comes less children, its a societal trend you can't really budge all that easely

=> nuclear is fine on current tech (and only gets better with later), its just something that has fewer but more staggering problems when it goes awry. (nobody speaks of all the coal fired plants getting problems)

=> good luck trying to stop that, you need to stop the ocean from heathing up then. Funnely enough the most effective way is also the way nature is heading: more pressure. Sad thing is that 1 meter of water doesn't offset the 1°C of heat the water has.

 

 

well the stone age people can go life with the libertarians, all on there own island

 

advancements are to be made will we desire to keep our humanity's main survival trait: empathy. but getting the next super-fix doesn't mean it will be used. Heck the electrical car has been here for LONGER then the petrol powered one. Sometimes stuff needs to be thought thruw not in months but decades.

Main problems with the electric car are these: 1. Length of trip 2. Speed of charge 3. Cost in materials and energy of batteries. One of the few cases where we are using some of the most efficient technology already, which is reflected in the market cost. We could save a lot in switching to natural gas, but it'd probably be better to hold off for electric. These problems could be eliminated by automated cars and car sharing. Only really far-ranging trips outside of populated areas would need fossil fuels at that point.

 

 

- pfffft, page 16: the lenght is not the issue, its the convenience people have with what is present (yay conservative people!).

- speed I can understand, thou a good 2 phase, high amp plug can do wonders.

- the bottle neck (and Chile's race to the top) is indeed Lithium. but then again is it? Its the 3rd most abundant element in the universe, give it some time and we will be taking it from our oceans.

 

 

Also, government should not subsidize low-income families, except with food stamps. Distribute condoms and make abortions free.

 

I've been trying to avoid this, but I can no longer sit on my hands and not talk about this. I need to ask the Dude about this.

 

Who is this magical Santa Claus that will come down the chimney and pass out rubbers, rip babies from girls bellies, and go back out the way he came and not even ask for a tip? I'm not an anti-abortion zealot, and I have no problem with women making the choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first few months to avoid life changing conditions, but abortion is a serious medical procedure that no one will do for free. Someone has to pay for it, and the Catholics will absolutely lose their minds if anyone tries to use taxpayer money to kill babies. Calling them names, ignoring them, or attempting to discount their opinions will get you nowhere.

 

People like me that are agnostic, but strongly believe that we are responsible for our own mistakes, will join them in making sure we don't support the irresponsible lifestyle of everyone else. If you give a heroin addict free dope to keep him from paying a dealer... please give him enough to plant him 6 feet under. If they don't care enough about their own life, you have to let them go. Their problem is not ours to carry.

 

Also these women that abort their children must realize they are killing their child... pay for it... and accept it for what it is. This fantasy that it's "just a blob of cells" is a lie, and forcing that responisibility on others is just wrong.

 

"Also, government should not subsidize low-income families"

Do I take this that you are in favor of a "Flat Tax"... or like me the "Fair Tax"? Tax exemptions are government susidies, and if your going to have a vote, I believe you should pay taxes. People that don't pay taxes are voting to increase taxes on everyone else that does. That's easy when other people are the ones that have to pay those tax increases. Everyone should have skin in the game, and if you vote to raise taxes, you vote to raise your own taxes. It's called... "paying your fair share".

 

For the record Dude... I think you are one of the finest minds on these boards.

 

Also, government should not subsidize low-income families, except with food stamps. Distribute condoms and make abortions free.

 

I've been trying to avoid this, but I can no longer sit on my hands and not talk about this. I need to ask the Dude about this.

 

Who is this magical Santa Claus that will come down the chimney and pass out rubbers, rip babies from girls bellies, and go back out the way he came and not even ask for a tip? I'm not an anti-abortion zealot, and I have no problem with women making the choice to terminate a pregnancy in the first few months to avoid life changing conditions, but abortion is a serious medical procedure that no one will do for free. Someone has to pay for it, and the Catholics will absolutely lose their minds if anyone tries to use taxpayer money to kill babies. Calling them names, ignoring them, or attempting to discount their opinions will get you nowhere.

 

People like me that are agnostic, but strongly believe that we are responsible for our own mistakes, will join them in making sure we don't support the irresponsible lifestyle of everyone else. If you give a heroin addict free dope to keep him from paying a dealer... please give him enough to plant him 6 feet under. If they don't care enough about their own life, you have to let them go. Their problem is not ours to carry.

 

Also these women that abort their children must realize they are killing their child... pay for it... and accept it for what it is. This fantasy that it's "just a blob of cells" is a lie, and forcing that responisibility on others is just wrong.

 

"Also, government should not subsidize low-income families"

Do I take this that you are in favor of a "Flat Tax"... or like me the "Fair Tax"? Tax exemptions are government susidies, and if your going to have a vote, I believe you should pay taxes. People that don't pay taxes are voting to increase taxes on everyone else that does. That's easy when other people are the ones that have to pay those tax increases. Everyone should have skin in the game, and if you vote to raise taxes, you vote to raise your own taxes. It's called... "paying your fair share".

 

For the record Dude... I think you are one of the finest minds on these boards.

 

The bolded section is your greatest mistake.   I would not say I'm particularly smart, just willing to explore different possibilities, no matter how bizarre or counter-cultural. That, combined with a willingness to be wrong and change when I am wrong, has gotten me a long way. It's not always pleasant, but it's better than allowing fantasies to dominate my existence. A lot of our current societal norms are dominated by mythological thinking (celebrity culture, materialism, etc).

 

I'm not going to look up the statistics right now (we can continue that in PM or a different thread), but there are some sociological theories that the SCOTUS abortion decision in the 70s actually resulted in a massive decrease in crime. It'd take a long time to explain all the logic (again, we've derailed this thread a lot already, but I'm willing to go into it elsewhere). Basically, kids that would've had reluctant or unhappy parents were never born. That ensured that kids with "bad parents", who were more likely to turn into criminals, have not become a burden on society. If you consider the cost ratio of the justice system vs. condoms or an abortion, the justice system costs far more to administer. Every dozen condoms distributed is one less unwanted child to end up in prison. That's a societal investment well worth paying.

 

Abortion itself is a long-winded topic that requires thought on consciousness, potential, and our treatment of non-human conciousness. I've also considered some extreme versions of it, like "Is infanticide wrong?" or "Do animals deserve the same protections?". It takes a while just to define personhood. Past humans considered anyone outside of their tribe/religion/etc. a non-person not deserving protections. We've gone past that, but how far should we continue? I'm largely willing to go with current societal definitions just because I do have to work for a living and can't spend enough time staring at my bellybutton.

 

I'm not even going into using religious arguments for government decisions. In my opinion, government should stay as far away from religious thought as possible, since religious thought is fantastical by its very nature. Also, just because I think a position correct doesn't mean I think it will be implemented in my lifetime. I accept that there are a lot of viewpoints on issues and understand that, as a member of society, I have to live by the consensus view for the most part. I can still think differently and try to convince people so that change goes through normal channels.

 

On taxes, flat taxes would hit a lot more rich people than you would think. If we were to have flat taxes, it needs to be truly flat. No tax breaks for industries or different sources of income (that capital gains, yo). No tax breaks for religious institutions or charities. And yes, no tax breaks for children or other dependents. If government wants to encourage something, then they actually need to make payments, rather than dress up Corporate Welfare as tax breaks. Republicans have given out far more money than Democrats, which is obvious when you take a look at the budget deficits when they are in power.

 

By "subsidize", I mainly meant Welfare, but yes, tax breaks would have to go. There would be a lot of pain at first as sticky prices readjust to less money in the system. However, I do think government needs to start providing basic foodstuffs, medical care, public transportation, and housing to EVERYONE that applies for it, no matter their income status. It could be served under the "right to life" clause, and I've stated before that there will be a time within the next 30-40 years when no one can find regular work. Make it where any income you actual earn is just discretionary income. That doesn't provide a lot to rich people (who would rather eat in restaurants or have personal chefs), but would eliminate the primary budget breakers for poor families. They'd still be encouraged to work, because they couldn't afford entertainment and other luxuries without working. However, you'd see a lot fewer bankruptcies and less theft.

 

The main issue is that we're rapidly approaching a post-scarcity society where capitalist mechanisms are no longer needed for the most basic goods, and aren't even in place for them, anyway. The hungry in America are generally hungry because they don't have access to food, not because the food they need doesn't exist. Most of our health problems, even in lower-income families, are related to having too many calories. Note I said post-scarcity, not post-consumerism. So there will still be pricing for many products. Most people have a problem separating luxuries (like any sort of cereal with sugar) from necessities (like oatmeal or bland cereal) thanks to overexposure to advertising and Hollywood norms.

Okay I get the idea that it's much cheaper to get rid of those unwanted children before they become drug addicts and criminals, but that's mommy and daddy's judgement, responsibility, and conscience. Leave it to the private sector to create a special abortion credit line to pay for it. I'm sure Capitol One would have us a plan by morning if called upon, but taxpayer cash can never be used to kill children.

 

Plus if we're dealing with things on the basis of cost... several well placed nukes would be much cheaper, and save numerous lives, with that war on terror money pit we have endured for the last few decades. We start showing them what they want so bad and just maybe they won't want it anymore. Notice Japan has never wanted nuclear weapons when they can have them tommorrow? I wonder why?

 

I believe it would be best if we taxed money when it's spent, and not when it's earned. People that buy more stuff pay more tax, and we don't have this problem with people not having enough money to pay their taxes. No duductions or loopholes. Food and other things that people need to live can be non-taxable. I really like the idea of giving the government the finger... if I don't want to pay taxes this week I just don't buy anything this week. Wonderful.

 

You always put a lot of thought in your posts, and it's pure logic, but that's not always the way we do things. I've been doing things the hard way my entire life, but I'm happy, content, and I sleep very well at night. I like it that way.

I'm not going to go into abortion or warfare norms here, since it's a long discussion involving differing value systems. I have a hard enough time sticking on topic, and climate change is important enough to leave this thread alone. If you'd like to discuss it, feel free to make another thread.

 

What you're talking about is a Value-Added-Tax, and it works pretty well for most of Europe. Many states (my home state being one of them) call it a sales tax. Its main attraction is that it is, as you said, a tax of choice, rather than one of necessity. It can discourage investment, but investment is not always good investment. Better to encourage use of labor through overtime laws and making healthcare public.

 

Logic and thought exercises are some of the best ways we have to test and simulate policies. As onbekende said, this is extremely important to ensure the best consequences for ourselves. Hurricanes don't care that you spent all of your money on a vacation home, or worse that you chose to live in a flood-prone area. They just destroy your house because that is what they do. Same with a lot of basic human psychology. The universe gives no fucks.

 

Careless people will have sex because sex feels good and there is a natural human drive to procreate. If a person already has problems controlling their emotions, I do not want them having kids. At best, the kid will find a mentor to actually raise him right or his parent will grow up and start making the right decisions. Most likely, she'll be just like her parent and be nothing but a societal sinkhole. Or, even worse, the parent will resent the kid, making him even more likely to develop mental problems that lead to criminal activities. Parenthood is not a magical thing that turns bad people into good parents. They usually turn into bad parents that yield bad kids.

 

Again, abortion and birth control should always be optional, but we can encourage it by defraying the costs. Abortion and birth control are actually the best ways to control the climate, because fewer people require fewer resources.

So sorry for derailing the global warming nonsense. I thought the thread died when it was pretty much agreed that it was old news and there is not a damn thing anyone can do about it, except the next time someone needs to make some money and they will alter some data and start all over again. The headline will say something like... "We're all gonna die!".

 

It's been the coolest July I can remember in Las Vegas. California got hammered with tons of rain and we always get it after them when it blows over here. It's a couple degrees warmer this week than last week and that's what I call climate change. It's 101F right now when a normal July day would average 110F. If you stay paranoid about the weather and, oh my god what are we gonna do about it... you will die of stress disorder before too long. I'll be flying first class to Hawaii for my anniversary in October... I hope it's still there!

So sorry for derailing the global warming nonsense. I thought the thread died when it was pretty much agreed that it was old news and there is not a damn thing anyone can do about it, except the next time someone needs to make some money and they will alter some data and start all over again. The headline will say something like... "We're all gonna die!".

 

It's been the coolest July I can remember in Las Vegas. California got hammered with tons of rain and we always get it after them when it blows over here. It's a couple degrees warmer this week than last week and that's what I call climate change. It's 101F right now when a normal July day would average 110F. If you stay paranoid about the weather and, oh my god what are we gonna do about it... you will die of stress disorder before too long. I'll be flying first class to Hawaii for my anniversary in October... I hope it's still there!

The weather changes every day, but the average as a whole has gone up. While there are a whole lot of mechanisms that aren't fully understood, it's hard to argue against resource conservation. Oil is just too useful for us to be burning it up day after day. Almost every product we buy has oil in one form or another. But I believe things will work themselves out due to the research that I've already mentioned.

 

Yeah, sometimes you just gotta say "Well, we're gonna die, anyway, or we can take a chance and live". If you find your arm pinned between a boulder and a cliff for days without signs of another person, sometimes you just gotta cut that sucker off.

 

Edit: Also, I'm cranky and don't feel up for the mental strain of an abortion debate right now. It's so values-based that it's nearly impossible to ever get anyone to budge.

*wakes up from long sleep*

Hey, I just want to put something in about electric cars. What is the percent of electricity created by fossil fuels in the U.S.? 67%. That means that we are still using fossil fuels to fuel the electric car. That is why some people are so ignorant, is because they don't see the whole picture, and this is a prime example.

*wakes up from long sleep*

Hey, I just want to put something in about electric cars. What is the percent of electricity created by fossil fuels in the U.S.? 67%. That means that we are still using fossil fuels to fuel the electric car. That is why some people are so ignorant, is because they don't see the whole picture, and this is a prime example.

Agreed, although the overriding goal of conserving resources is a good one. If you burn up oil or coal, there isn't a magical mechanism that creates more. Maybe we'd rather keep oil for petrochemicals and plastics rather than moving a meatsack to the corner store for some cigarettes. Coal can actually be turned into oil if needed, but if it's gone that option isn't there for us.

 

The main benefit of electric cars is it allows us to use more efficient means of energy generation. Small engines will always be less efficient than large generators because of the scale, and it will always be harder to mitigate the downsides of small engines.

 

Unfortunately, everyone is so focused on developing the end product (the car) that they've completely forgotten the prerequisite technology (the batteries). Batteries also have a ton of extra functionality beyond just cars (such as industrial equipment and renewable generators). All of the money being flushed down the toilet by Tesla would be better focused on just battery research. Same with the money being given to solar companies that go bankrupt over and over again. Batteries may not be sexy, but without them NOTHING on the green side will ever work. Until they are cheap, durable, low-weight, and have a large capacity, green tech will not gain traction.

 

If Al Gore really cared about the planet, he'd use his money to get a pHD in Chemical engineering and Electrical engineering to solve this problem or pay a student to do so. But it's far easier for him to bitch about the problem so people fund his mansions that way they feel like they did something.

 

P.S. Sorry if I'm going overboard on this, but I really hate the evangelical mindset that both left and right-wingers use to bilk money out of their followers for no real result. It's all "this is such a problem" and "give money to this cause" rather than "here is how you can help" or "give money to this solution". It's the same reasoning that PETA uses to crush their competitors at community animal shelters in donations ("shut them down because they kill pets!") while still using the same methods at their own facilities (PETA has killed hundreds of animals at their headquarters alone). There are tons of poor kids who would love a chance at college and an academic career. Fund them and their research, instead, and you'll get far better dividends than Gore will ever give you.

 

*wakes up from long sleep*

Hey, I just want to put something in about electric cars. What is the percent of electricity created by fossil fuels in the U.S.? 67%. That means that we are still using fossil fuels to fuel the electric car. That is why some people are so ignorant, is because they don't see the whole picture, and this is a prime example.

Agreed, although the overriding goal of conserving resources is a good one. If you burn up oil or coal, there isn't a magical mechanism that creates more. Maybe we'd rather keep oil for petrochemicals and plastics rather than moving a meatsack to the corner store for some cigarettes. Coal can actually be turned into oil if needed, but if it's gone that option isn't there for us.

And even carbondioxide can be turned into methane, which in turn can be scaled up to any poly-hydrocarbon.

 

 

P.S. I can be your chemical engineer? Howmuch you paying?

 

 

*wakes up from long sleep*

Hey, I just want to put something in about electric cars. What is the percent of electricity created by fossil fuels in the U.S.? 67%. That means that we are still using fossil fuels to fuel the electric car. That is why some people are so ignorant, is because they don't see the whole picture, and this is a prime example.

Agreed, although the overriding goal of conserving resources is a good one. If you burn up oil or coal, there isn't a magical mechanism that creates more. Maybe we'd rather keep oil for petrochemicals and plastics rather than moving a meatsack to the corner store for some cigarettes. Coal can actually be turned into oil if needed, but if it's gone that option isn't there for us.

And even carbondioxide can be turned into methane, which in turn can be scaled up to any poly-hydrocarbon.

 

 

P.S. I can be your chemical engineer? Howmuch you paying?

 

There's always the question of energy efficiency, but it's nice to know we can get it if we really have to.

 

P.S. I'm more on the civil side of things, but if you've got the qualifications for chemical engineer, you either make far more money than I can dream of, or need to move to Texas where you can make more money than I can dream of. Now get some background in electrical and invent us a better battery! Not only will you get so much money that you can spend the rest of your days spamming, but you'll have overcome a major hurdle on the way to a greener tomorrow.

 

I wouldn't mind financing someone's education, and possibly could for a state school, but I would need a financial or marital contract to do so, plus background assurances that they wouldn't run off to join the circus. I'm not in poverty by any means. However, I'm in no position to throw money around, either. A bad economic or career stretch could just as easily land me under the nearest overpass as a good stretch could land me in the C-suite. Only way I got to my current stability is through a lot of work (est. 60+ hours a week, about 10 hrs/week unpaid studying) and saving in my twenties. In about ten more years, I'll have a much better idea on where I land. Until then, ain't no rich sugar daddy around here.

I already am a chemical engineer and I actually doubt I make more then you. In part because I am lazy and avoid any type of responcibility

I already am a chemical engineer and I actually doubt I make more then you. In part because I am lazy and avoid any type of responcibility

But, onbekende, the environment. It neeeeeeds yoooouuuu.

You can come to me for the labwork, but actually thinking something thruw? nah >_>

You can come to me for the labwork, but actually thinking something thruw? nah >_>

For just a few months of work, you could have a lifetime of drinking on the beach. Or playing the vidja games. 

effort

responcibility

needing a car