Three Way Discussion on Coal-Nuclear-Alternative Energy

lukin2006 · August 2016

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:
Jill Stein just said she wanted to zero out fossil fuels by 2030. No thanks.
Why not?
There are millions of jobs to be created and it's what we NEED to do for the future.
How will we make plastics and metals for modern life when we are out of oil because we burned it all up for energy?

Do you know how much oil is used to make an MRI machine? AMBU bags, IV tubes, syringes...the list of things we need petrochemicals to make is astounding, burning it all up is not a good idea.
Because regardless of what the "green" people tell you, there is no other cost effective way to produce energy than burning coal. Other than nuclear facilities. I don't see nuclear power plants popping up every where. Wind and solar are not cost effective and they can't produce the megawatts needed efficiently. Plus, that would put me out of a job. There are not enough jobs to be created that wold be lost if the coal industry was shut down. There are not millions of jobs available in the "green" market.
You are buying the company line a little too eagerly. Coal isn't nearly as efficient or cheap as the industry would have you believe. Without the taxpayers subsidizing the fossil fuel industries they would have gone belly-up a generation ago. If those subsidies were redirected to green industries the costs would be competitive in the short run, and would absolutely shred fossil fuels in the long run.
And yes, there are millions of jobs available.
Agreed. Fossil fuels will go the way of the dodo someday, and that will be a glorious day. It just can't be done in 14 years. I wish.
I think it's possible, think of the space race.
Improbable, sure, but you gotta try for the top to get to the middle.

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:
Jill Stein just said she wanted to zero out fossil fuels by 2030. No thanks.
Why not?
There are millions of jobs to be created and it's what we NEED to do for the future.
How will we make plastics and metals for modern life when we are out of oil because we burned it all up for energy?

Do you know how much oil is used to make an MRI machine? AMBU bags, IV tubes, syringes...the list of things we need petrochemicals to make is astounding, burning it all up is not a good idea.
Because regardless of what the "green" people tell you, there is no other cost effective way to produce energy than burning coal. Other than nuclear facilities. I don't see nuclear power plants popping up every where. Wind and solar are not cost effective and they can't produce the megawatts needed efficiently. Plus, that would put me out of a job. There are not enough jobs to be created that wold be lost if the coal industry was shut down. There are not millions of jobs available in the "green" market.
You are buying the company line a little too eagerly. Coal isn't nearly as efficient or cheap as the industry would have you believe. Without the taxpayers subsidizing the fossil fuel industries they would have gone belly-up a generation ago. If those subsidies were redirected to green industries the costs would be competitive in the short run, and would absolutely shred fossil fuels in the long run.
And yes, there are millions of jobs available.
Agreed. Fossil fuels will go the way of the dodo someday, and that will be a glorious day. It just can't be done in 14 years. I wish.
I think it's possible, think of the space race.
Improbable, sure, but you gotta try for the top to get to the middle.
I think it's impossible, but I agree that those who are trying need to reach for the top, and they already are, which is great. Their very best can't get it done in 14 years.

I find it kind of ironic how america is at odds with russia over crimea and yet you rely on them to get your astronauts to space ... that tells me how weak america is becoming.

PJ_Soul · August 2016

The space program is all about international cooperation (not just with Russia and the US). It's considered a positive, the path to an ideal, a step in the right direction. I don't understand why you are twisting that into a negative at all. Are you advocating for another space race??

lukin2006 · August 2016

The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.

PJ_Soul · August 2016

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.

That's not what I asked about really.

lukin2006 · August 2016

PJ_Soul said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
That's not what I asked about really.

Fair enough ... you see it as international cooperation, I see it as huge waste of money being fleeced from taxpayers. Maybe we could use that money to tackle some of earthly problems is how I see it.

brianlux · August 2016

PJ_Soul said:

Degeneratefk said:
Jill Stein just said she wanted to zero out fossil fuels by 2030. No thanks.
It is completely unfeasible, but not undesirable in theory. To do it by 2030 is a ridiculous endeavor rooted in fantasy. Such a statement pretty much sums up why I can't support the Green Party.

I thinks it's both not doable AND spot on. This is America. If you want something done, you have to ask more than what you will get. If you want people to try 50% harder to do an important job you have to ask for 75% more.

brianlux · August 2016

In all this talk about replacing fossil fuels we really would do well to address the reality of the situation: 7.4 billion people cannot consume energy and resources at the rate most people in first world countries do. The solution is threefold:
-reduce population
-develop clean alternative energy sources
- and consume less of both!

Gtilley8 · August 2016

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.

Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?

lukin2006 · August 2016

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?

You mean a couple of billionaires ... billionaires waste money all the time. Kind of a lame argument, how many billionaires buy sports teams that never make money, it's done all the time...and I really love how these billionaires invest in expensive hobbies and then use the tax system to write off said losses. Wish I could write my hobbies off and download the expense to an overburdened middle to lower middle class taxpayers. You can make a study say whatever it wants. I'm sure there studies that say the government returns 7 dollars for every dollar spent on military. Nice try though...

Gtilley8 · August 2016

lukin2006 said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?
You mean a couple of billionaires ... billionaires waste money all the time. Kind of a lame argument, how many billionaires buy sports teams that never make money, it's done all the time...and I really love how these billionaires invest in expensive hobbies and then use the tax system to write off said losses. Wish I could write my hobbies off and download the expense to an overburdened middle to lower middle class taxpayers. You can make a study say whatever it wants. I'm sure there studies that say the government returns 7 dollars for every dollar spent on military. Nice try though...

Maybe they are just throwing money at a hobby. Or maybe, 2 entrepreneurs see the value in the vast amount of natural resources that space holds. I'll go with the latter. Nobody is "trying" anything here. Sometimes the correct answer is the easiest. Business are created to make a profit.

brianlux · August 2016

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?
You mean a couple of billionaires ... billionaires waste money all the time. Kind of a lame argument, how many billionaires buy sports teams that never make money, it's done all the time...and I really love how these billionaires invest in expensive hobbies and then use the tax system to write off said losses. Wish I could write my hobbies off and download the expense to an overburdened middle to lower middle class taxpayers. You can make a study say whatever it wants. I'm sure there studies that say the government returns 7 dollars for every dollar spent on military. Nice try though...
Maybe they are just throwing money at a hobby. Or maybe, 2 entrepreneurs see the value in the vast amount of natural resources that space holds. I'll go with the latter. Nobody is "trying" anything here. Sometimes the correct answer is the easiest. Business are created to make a profit.

Sounds great and numerous sci fi stories and movies have made this prospect seem easily with in reach but there are many factors often overlooked. This article points out some of the limitations to space mining. We should also consider that if we don't address some of the serious issues facing us now (global warming, looming energy shortages, lack of available fresh water in many parts of the world, loss of biodiversity, potential pandemic from excessive use of antibiotics, to name a few) we may well not get to even try such grand schemes.

Pretty good article here:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117815/space-mining-will-not-solve-earths-conflict-over-natural-resources

Gtilley8 · August 2016

brianlux said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?
You mean a couple of billionaires ... billionaires waste money all the time. Kind of a lame argument, how many billionaires buy sports teams that never make money, it's done all the time...and I really love how these billionaires invest in expensive hobbies and then use the tax system to write off said losses. Wish I could write my hobbies off and download the expense to an overburdened middle to lower middle class taxpayers. You can make a study say whatever it wants. I'm sure there studies that say the government returns 7 dollars for every dollar spent on military. Nice try though...
Maybe they are just throwing money at a hobby. Or maybe, 2 entrepreneurs see the value in the vast amount of natural resources that space holds. I'll go with the latter. Nobody is "trying" anything here. Sometimes the correct answer is the easiest. Business are created to make a profit.
Sounds great and numerous sci fi stories and movies have made this prospect seem easily with in reach but there are many factors often overlooked. This article points out some of the limitations to space mining. We should also consider that if we don't address some of the serious issues facing us now (global warming, looming energy shortages, lack of available fresh water in many parts of the world, loss of biodiversity, potential pandemic from excessive use of antibiotics, to name a few) we may well not get to even try such grand schemes.

Pretty good article here:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117815/space-mining-will-not-solve-earths-conflict-over-natural-resources

I agree. I am probably over-simplifying this to the point of it being a near future ability, when the reality is, I'll never see it in my lifetime. And we should move towards clean energy and fixing your other started issues. But just as we should move now to make those strides, I believe that we should be doing the same with space exploration. In fact, I believe that the 2 might end up washing each other's hand, so to speak.

brianlux · August 2016

Gtilley8 said:

brianlux said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:

Gtilley8 said:

lukin2006 said:
The space station and space exploration is a huge waste of money ... more government waste.
Most every study done estimates a $7-$14 return on each dollar spent on NASA. Do you honestly believe people like Branson and Musk, a couple of guys interested in profit, are simply trying to go to space because it's fun?
You mean a couple of billionaires ... billionaires waste money all the time. Kind of a lame argument, how many billionaires buy sports teams that never make money, it's done all the time...and I really love how these billionaires invest in expensive hobbies and then use the tax system to write off said losses. Wish I could write my hobbies off and download the expense to an overburdened middle to lower middle class taxpayers. You can make a study say whatever it wants. I'm sure there studies that say the government returns 7 dollars for every dollar spent on military. Nice try though...
Maybe they are just throwing money at a hobby. Or maybe, 2 entrepreneurs see the value in the vast amount of natural resources that space holds. I'll go with the latter. Nobody is "trying" anything here. Sometimes the correct answer is the easiest. Business are created to make a profit.
Sounds great and numerous sci fi stories and movies have made this prospect seem easily with in reach but there are many factors often overlooked. This article points out some of the limitations to space mining. We should also consider that if we don't address some of the serious issues facing us now (global warming, looming energy shortages, lack of available fresh water in many parts of the world, loss of biodiversity, potential pandemic from excessive use of antibiotics, to name a few) we may well not get to even try such grand schemes.

Pretty good article here:

https://newrepublic.com/article/117815/space-mining-will-not-solve-earths-conflict-over-natural-resources

I agree. I am probably over-simplifying this to the point of it being a near future ability, when the reality is, I'll never see it in my lifetime. And we should move towards clean energy and fixing your other started issues. But just as we should move now to make those strides, I believe that we should be doing the same with space exploration. In fact, I believe that the 2 might end up washing each other's hand, so to speak.

My mother would agree with you 1,000 percent, rest her soul.

Degeneratefk · August 2016

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:
Jill Stein just said she wanted to zero out fossil fuels by 2030. No thanks.
Why not?
There are millions of jobs to be created and it's what we NEED to do for the future.
How will we make plastics and metals for modern life when we are out of oil because we burned it all up for energy?

Do you know how much oil is used to make an MRI machine? AMBU bags, IV tubes, syringes...the list of things we need petrochemicals to make is astounding, burning it all up is not a good idea.
Because regardless of what the "green" people tell you, there is no other cost effective way to produce energy than burning coal. Other than nuclear facilities. I don't see nuclear power plants popping up every where. Wind and solar are not cost effective and they can't produce the megawatts needed efficiently. Plus, that would put me out of a job. There are not enough jobs to be created that wold be lost if the coal industry was shut down. There are not millions of jobs available in the "green" market.
You are buying the company line a little too eagerly. Coal isn't nearly as efficient or cheap as the industry would have you believe. Without the taxpayers subsidizing the fossil fuel industries they would have gone belly-up a generation ago. If those subsidies were redirected to green industries the costs would be competitive in the short run, and would absolutely shred fossil fuels in the long run.
And yes, there are millions of jobs available.
Agreed. Fossil fuels will go the way of the dodo someday, and that will be a glorious day. It just can't be done in 14 years. I wish.
I think it's possible, think of the space race.
Improbable, sure, but you gotta try for the top to get to the middle.

No, im not falling for any company line. Solar and wind are not cost efficient right now. Unless you want a $700 monthly power bill, coal is the way to go. That is simple fact. It's extremely cost effecting to burn coal. I do understand that coal will run out one day. But it's not any time soon. Until another way to make bulk power is created, coal will always be there.

NJPearlJam · August 2016

To be honest....the only thing that matters this November is keeping that psycho Trump out of the White House. Clinton has the best chance, like it or not, so she has to get my vote. Trump's defeat trumps all else.

Gtilley8 · August 2016

NJPearlJam said:
To be honest....the only thing that matters this November is keeping that psycho Trump out of the White House. Clinton has the best chance, like it or not, so she has to get my vote. Trump's defeat trumps all else.

Agreed. I think if we all just keep that in mind, we'll be OK.

brianlux · August 2016

Degeneratefk said:

rgambs said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:

rgambs said:

Degeneratefk said:
Jill Stein just said she wanted to zero out fossil fuels by 2030. No thanks.
Why not?
There are millions of jobs to be created and it's what we NEED to do for the future.
How will we make plastics and metals for modern life when we are out of oil because we burned it all up for energy?

Do you know how much oil is used to make an MRI machine? AMBU bags, IV tubes, syringes...the list of things we need petrochemicals to make is astounding, burning it all up is not a good idea.
Because regardless of what the "green" people tell you, there is no other cost effective way to produce energy than burning coal. Other than nuclear facilities. I don't see nuclear power plants popping up every where. Wind and solar are not cost effective and they can't produce the megawatts needed efficiently. Plus, that would put me out of a job. There are not enough jobs to be created that wold be lost if the coal industry was shut down. There are not millions of jobs available in the "green" market.
You are buying the company line a little too eagerly. Coal isn't nearly as efficient or cheap as the industry would have you believe. Without the taxpayers subsidizing the fossil fuel industries they would have gone belly-up a generation ago. If those subsidies were redirected to green industries the costs would be competitive in the short run, and would absolutely shred fossil fuels in the long run.
And yes, there are millions of jobs available.
Agreed. Fossil fuels will go the way of the dodo someday, and that will be a glorious day. It just can't be done in 14 years. I wish.
I think it's possible, think of the space race.
Improbable, sure, but you gotta try for the top to get to the middle.
No, im not falling for any company line. Solar and wind are not cost efficient right now. Unless you want a $700 monthly power bill, coal is the way to go. That is simple fact. It's extremely cost effecting to burn coal. I do understand that coal will run out one day. But it's not any time soon. Until another way to make bulk power is created, coal will always be there.

Coal may not always be around but it will, at least for a long, long time. Who knows, maybe even long enough for people coal to form in our sedimentary layer. The question is, are we going to become future coal ourselves before our time because we put too much carbon into the atmosphere during this lifetime? The science say yeah, we are. I just don't get the benefit, Deg. Not trying to step on toes, just sayin'. :-)

mickeyrat · August 2016

lukin2006 said:
...and for all those that like to bitch that all private companies are gangsters, well I never hear people complaining of there gas bills in the winter, but their is countless stories of people who are forced to heat with hydro forgone reason or another complaining about their winter hydro bills, and now the complaints are starting over their summer hydro bills because its been a humid summer ... and some people are forced to use air for a variety of reasons. We've done away with coal...ask real Ontarians how thats working out for them. Got to love the government and their ideas ... they can completely turn the electrical grid upside down with no business plan, just like all their ideas. Don't worry our premier plans to build bike lanes on all new highways and roadways, good use of money ... actually id like to nominate our premier as queen of environmental movement, thats all that the environmental movement needs nows a true leader like her.

can you define a couple things for me?

we can start with " real Ontarian" ?

and what I would guess is the opposite in "unreal Ontarian" or whatever term for the not real ones you choose or use.

mickeyrat · August 2016

lukin2006 said:
...and for all those that like to bitch that all private companies are gangsters, well I never hear people complaining of there gas bills in the winter, but their is countless stories of people who are forced to heat with hydro forgone reason or another complaining about their winter hydro bills, and now the complaints are starting over their summer hydro bills because its been a humid summer ... and some people are forced to use air for a variety of reasons. We've done away with coal...ask real Ontarians how thats working out for them. Got to love the government and their ideas ... they can completely turn the electrical grid upside down with no business plan, just like all their ideas. Don't worry our premier plans to build bike lanes on all new highways and roadways, good use of money ... actually id like to nominate our premier as queen of environmental movement, thats all that the environmental movement needs nows a true leader like her.

can you define a couple things for me?

we can start with " real Ontarian" ?

and what I would guess is the opposite in "unreal Ontarian" or whatever term for the not real ones you choose or use.

lukin2006 · August 2016

mickeyrat said:

lukin2006 said:
...and for all those that like to bitch that all private companies are gangsters, well I never hear people complaining of there gas bills in the winter, but their is countless stories of people who are forced to heat with hydro forgone reason or another complaining about their winter hydro bills, and now the complaints are starting over their summer hydro bills because its been a humid summer ... and some people are forced to use air for a variety of reasons. We've done away with coal...ask real Ontarians how thats working out for them. Got to love the government and their ideas ... they can completely turn the electrical grid upside down with no business plan, just like all their ideas. Don't worry our premier plans to build bike lanes on all new highways and roadways, good use of money ... actually id like to nominate our premier as queen of environmental movement, thats all that the environmental movement needs nows a true leader like her.
can you define a couple things for me?

we can start with " real Ontarian" ?

and what I would guess is the opposite in "unreal Ontarian" or whatever term for the not real ones you choose or use.

Ontarians is often used to describe citizens of Ontario. Real as in someone who will give you an honest answer regarding their bills, those people, not the radical liberals running this province...

Three Way Discussion on Coal-Nuclear-Alternative Energy

Comments

Categories