5 years later and still no alternative fuel option

Derrick

Who cares about Bin Laden or revenge on terrorists if we aren't working towards reversing the damage we've done to this planet? Paint the stars and stripes across the world when it becomes unlivable.

In 2008, eight precious years will have been lost to a stupid expensive war, and every dime could have been spent on the fuel cell, or some other engine fueling technology. Catch Osama or don't...it really doesn't matter. There are bigger problems. Much, much bigger.

Prior to 'Wishlist' Ed talks about scientist Stephen Hawking and how he discovered that humans were only going to live a thousand more years on the planet. He says, "I'm trying to figure out what that means. Do we go fucking nuts for the next 1,000 years?" (Strumming rapidly on his guitar for a few seconds with his head back, freaking out.) "Or are we careful who we vote for?"

He also said something like he would be happy for the planet to be finally rid of us. Too True. Maybe the next race to dominate this planet wont be so cruel.

macgyver06

do you drive a car?

Derrick

as little as possible

jlew24asu

I would rather have bin laden dead. I dont really see how spending money on a war has anything to do with saving the planet. our country has more then enough resources to do both. finding alternative feuls is not the governments responsibilty in the first place. sure then are trying and so is the private sector. its not lack of effort or resources, its just they we havnt figured it out yet

Pickr

jlew24asu wrote:

I would rather have bin laden dead. I dont really see how spending money on a war has anything to do with saving the planet. our country has more then enough resources to do both. finding alternative feuls is not the governments responsibilty in the first place. sure then are trying and so is the private sector. its not lack of effort or resources, its just they we havnt figured it out yet

Even if it was a goverments responsibility it is not only the US goverments responsibility, we are talking about earth, not just the American part of it.

El_Kabong

jlew24asu wrote:

finding alternative feuls is not the governments responsibilty in the first place. sure then are trying and so is the private sector. its not lack of effort or resources, its just they we havnt figured it out yet

yes they have

you can say it's not the government's responsibility, but is it their responsibility to slow it down? clinton had an initiative that auto makers had to have a prototype by a certain date...bush came in and got rid of it...even if we raised the fuel efficincy standard just 3 more miles to the gallon <which could easily be done> we would save more oil than even the best estimates of ANWR...but cheney said this was "unfair to ask of the auto industry"

blackredyellow

I could care less about bin laden being dead or not...

I would love to see what we could have come up with in 5 years if the $300+ billion dollars spent on the Iraq war could have been used for a "manhattan project" type energy project.

onelongsong

i'm 100% solar and that's alternative energy. bio-desiel is alternative energy and some cities use it exclusively for public transportation. we have hybrid cars using alternative energy. ethenol is perfect for heating. i'm not sure where you're from but no one is on the grid here.

macgyver06

El_Kabong wrote:

yes they have

you can say it's not the government's responsibility, but is it their responsibility to slow it down? clinton had an initiative that auto makers had to have a prototype by a certain date...bush came in and got rid of it...even if we raised the fuel efficincy standard just 3 more miles to the gallon <which could easily be done> we would save more oil than even the best estimates of ANWR...but cheney said this was "unfair to ask of the auto industry"

the longer we refer to 'the government' 'their responsiblity' they will keep trating 'us' like peasants and know-nothings.. don't wait for 'your government', it's us can do something. 'the people'.. DO SOMETHING FOR YOURSELF! and than you can help the WORLD.

the government needs ... to do nothing!

macgyver06

lol sorrry for yelling.. but come on.. we need the right attitude when doing stuff.

darkcrow

GM unveiled a new type of car that runs on a hydrogen fuel cell. they said they wanna make it mass market in around 10 years time or so. i think they called i the sequel...

El_Kabong

macgyver06 wrote:

the longer we refer to 'the government' 'their responsiblity' they will keep trating 'us' like peasants and know-nothings.. don't wait for 'your government', it's us can do something. 'the people'.. DO SOMETHING FOR YOURSELF! and than you can help the WORLD.

the government needs ... to do nothing!

did i say it was their responsability? no, i said they were slowing it down.

onelongsong

jlew24asu wrote:

I would rather have bin laden dead. I dont really see how spending money on a war has anything to do with saving the planet. our country has more then enough resources to do both. finding alternative feuls is not the governments responsibilty in the first place. sure then are trying and so is the private sector. its not lack of effort or resources, its just they we havnt figured it out yet

what exactly do you want the government to do? the government paid for 65% of my solar electric array through tax incentives. the government is willing to pay you to use alternative energy sources. they will also pay you to develope other sources. do you want the government stepping into the free enterprise system and looking for more oil or forming companies in the system; or do you want them to do their job while we do ours?

jlew24asu

onelongsong wrote:

what exactly do you want the government to do? the government paid for 65% of my solar electric array through tax incentives. the government is willing to pay you to use alternative energy sources. they will also pay you to develope other sources. do you want the government stepping into the free enterprise system and looking for more oil or forming companies in the system; or do you want them to do their job while we do ours?

im not knocking the government. I think they are helping but more can be done. on everyones part. I dont understand your response.

jlew24asu

El_Kabong wrote:

yes they have

you can say it's not the government's responsibility, but is it their responsibility to slow it down? clinton had an initiative that auto makers had to have a prototype by a certain date...bush came in and got rid of it...even if we raised the fuel efficincy standard just 3 more miles to the gallon <which could easily be done> we would save more oil than even the best estimates of ANWR...but cheney said this was "unfair to ask of the auto industry"

no they havent. if it was, we would all be using it. I agree this administration should be doing more but if the technology was readily available, the government cant stop it from being mass produced. its called capitalism

Derrick

Sure, capitalism will prevail. But capitalism is driven off of dollars and cents....the bottom line. ___THAT'S___ where the government comes in, to make socially and environmentally conscious laws and benefits such that it is profitable to make innovations that help the future.

RockinInCanada

Derrick wrote:

Sure, capitalism will prevail. But capitalism is driven off of dollars and cents....the bottom line. ___THAT'S___ where the government comes in, to make socially and environmentally conscious laws and benefits such that it is profitable to make innovations that help the future.

Not when policy is driven by corporations...or for that matter where all the lobbying money comes from....people are ignorant to think better technology does not exist yet.....but when your pockets are being lined with heap upon heap of oil money the incentive to promote better technology would seem somewhat less attractive.....

jlew24asu

Rockin'InCanada wrote:

Not when policy is driven by corporations...or for that matter where all the lobbying money comes from....people are ignorant to think better technology does not exist yet.....but when your pockets are being lined with heap upon heap of oil money the incentive to promote better technology would seem somewhat less attractive.....

the technology might exsist in some form but its not ready to be massly produced in vechilces and not to mention having gas stations equipt with hydrogen pumps

Uncle Leo

Derrick wrote:

Sure, capitalism will prevail. But capitalism is driven off of dollars and cents....the bottom line. ___THAT'S___ where the government comes in, to make socially and environmentally conscious laws and benefits such that it is profitable to make innovations that help the future.

Right. Free market economics is really a series of cause-and-effects. If A happens, then B will happen. The problem is that the market is flawed. The market does not create national defense, public schools or any incentive to curb pollution and not have eight year olds working 80 hour weeks. Economics does not account for the environment. It is essentially a non factor. As resources start to get depleted, it will account for that (i.e. oil), but not for air and water pollution. The government intervenes when the market fails. People may disagree on when it fails, but I happen to think that the complete lack of adjustment for the environmental effects of what we do is a market failure. Therefore, I think it is the government's role to intervene and help us be more environmentally conscious.

onelongsong

jlew24asu wrote:

im not knocking the government. I think they are helping but more can be done. on everyones part. I dont understand your response.

the governments job is to inform the public. for example; the government tells you that you have one gallon of water left. it is not the governments place to regulate how much of that water you drink and how often. if this were the case; the government would have to limit the number of miles you drive; the hours you're allowed to use electricty; etc. or maybe limit the amount of gas a person can buy per month. that's why the government cannot step in. you've been told for over 30 years now what you're doing to the enviornment yet few people listen. if you want government intervention it would be in the form of laws allowing 1 car per family and only 30 gallons of gas per week or month. the use of electricity a couple hours in the morning and a couple at night. the government already pays both public and businesses to use alternative energy. that's why i asked: what more do you want. throw me a few ideas and i'll be happy to pass them on to the senate.

macgyver06

onelongsong wrote:

the governments job is to inform the public. for example; the government tells you that you have one gallon of water left. it is not the governments place to regulate how much of that water you drink and how often. if this were the case; the government would have to limit the number of miles you drive; the hours you're allowed to use electricty; etc. or maybe limit the amount of gas a person can buy per month. that's why the government cannot step in. you've been told for over 30 years now what you're doing to the enviornment yet few people listen. if you want government intervention it would be in the form of laws allowing 1 car per family and only 30 gallons of gas per week or month. the use of electricity a couple hours in the morning and a couple at night. the government already pays both public and businesses to use alternative energy. that's why i asked: what more do you want. throw me a few ideas and i'll be happy to pass them on to the senate.

awesome post. i think the trend of this 'lack of self responsibility', and 'dumb and happy', and 'life wasted' might be fading away..at least it should. Maybe we could reward those who choose not to drive to 'McDOnald's ' and choose not to water there stupid lawns' a reward system. somehow