After reading the Amnesty post I realized we need a new thread. Rladew
argued for oil exploration in Alaska as a step towards energy independence.
"I agree we need alternative fuel sources, but I havent seen enough proof that wind and solar would yield the amount of power the US uses... My point was that if we are going to use OIL, the more we can make by ourselves w/out Middle East assistance, the better."
I hear this all the time. But we all know ANWR is a drop in the bucket, so what's the difference. If it's a limited supply, why not start an unlimited supply?
"Why dont we go 100% solar and wind power? then we can cover 100% of ANWR (and the rest of America for that matter) with low power yielding panels and windmills that wont be awkward eyesores and will surely hinder all economic prosperity for free enterprise? Im sure our friend Ralph Nader would be glad to assist..."
I understand there is some sarcasm here, but do people feel there is any rationality to this argument? How would renewable energies hurt free enterprise? If the electricity for my restaurant comes from a windmill instead of a nuclear plant, how am I hindered? I have no idea where this argument comes from, or even how it gets circulated, but obviously someone is saying it. Did Rladew come up with it himself, or is big oil causing some paranoia in right wing America?
What is wrong with alternative energies?
Asthetics? Do people actually find coal burning plants better looking than windmills? How about those nuclear reactors? Are they better looking than a black roof covered in solar panels? Eyesores, the roofs were already black! I remember talking to my friend Pete Dougherty when he was starting at Harvard Design school, that we need to build good looking windmills. Yet the more I researched it, the more I realized nature (read physics) dictates what an efficient windmill looks like. Further, I began to see the beauty in them, similar to seashells and leaf growth.
Is that if you like solar panels your a wimp? What gives? I just don't understand it.
I feel like Pamsterdam here. Am I just too naive, or do we have to "follow the money?" Is capitalism to blame? Or when I point out how economical alt energy is, does it help?
_______________________________
He who controls the spice...
_______________________________
frame 609 and Rory have definitely given me something to think about here. "Hydraulic Despotism" wow.
I never looked at it this way.
I have to dig out my Frank Herbert stuff now...
_______________________________
The trouble we are in in the Middle East is because we chose to go there.
The reason we chose to go there is _money_ not oil.
If we became dependent on solar power we would probably invade the sunniest country on the planet.
Imagine what fun it would be if middle east oil was priced in Euros (thus screwing up the value of the dollar) and the Chinese and Indian markets demanded all they could produce without having to sell to the hated infidels
the sad fact is all the windmills and solar panels in the world can't stop people driving idiotic wankermobiles - only the government can.... and the government is run by Exxon
controls the remote control...
controls the car to buy more Nattie Light and Munchos...
shrugs indiferrently as he runs over a chipmunk...
the chipmunk's last words are,"sol....ar pow...errr"
the man in the car, smiles the smile of cancer...
turns up the radio, as he realizes David Bowie is on...
the above post was intended to state (in an admittedly silly manner):
We are all of the same page, ladies and gents...
.
We're all on the same page, FtY, except for PChippy and I put (every last red cent of) our money where our mouth is-- our new place has solar panels.
.
Not that our decision was all that altruistic-- we invested in a place close to public transportation, walkable to everywhere, in a row house (very heat efficient), because we don't want to be dependent on oil, or car commuting, and feel like with oil prices going the way they are, it would be worth putting every last red cent into.
.
Call us the OPEC of Yuppie Scumlords. We want to own this version of energy efficient living, and think in the long run, we could make a good profit from it.
.
And, if we don't end up making a bunch of money, we'll be able to console ourselves with being good to the environment.
________________
<i>The Boot Knife of Mild Reason </i>
In 1983 we had actually decreased to 30 quadrillian BTU, and that's with a larger population.
In 2003 we were back to 39 quads. TWO THIRDS of which is for transportation.
(<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200507/fallows">source</a> -- yeah, i got hot and bothered after reading this article last night)
---
Conservation _can_ help. More so than new sources of oil. We are in Iraq because people need to drive their low mpg vehicles (a personal choice, can't argue with that) an hour a day to commute back and forth to work.
Your commute distance is a personal choice too, however, it is tempered by public transportation policy and economic policy.
More public transportation. More housing near jobs. More jobs. These things would all help to reduce dependency on oil. It's not that we need more sources of oil (it'll all run out, eventually) it's that we need to become less dependent on it.
The money spent exploring ANWR could be better spent developing alternative energies and on energy efficiency. Notice how no one wanted to drill in Alaska when the price per barrel was below $50? It's too expensive to drill up there. In the end, ANWR drilling is corporate welfare, not a solution to the US energy needs.
"Exxon, officially the US's most valuable company valued at $379bn (£206bn) earlier this year, is seen in the papers to share the White House's unwavering scepticism of international efforts to address climate change."
And then this.
Deny and Lie, Deny and Lie. Not a shocker, but just as depressing... Mr. Bush your legacy is doomed.
1. Thank you, everyone (genuinely) for the extra insight on conservation and the matter regarding ANWR. I am starting to change my point of view on this.
2. Even if I dont fully support drilling in ANWR, making the suggestion was extreemly pleasurable, if only to get so many adamant responses...
just my .02
_______________________________
_______________________________
Which reminds me that I may have completely screwed up nearly two years of beer consumption because I always frequented 660 Liquours instead of taking the longer walk to Sav-Mor which has an incredible selection.
For my dime, though, Fallon's Wine & Spirits in Littleton Depot is the bomb. Case discounts for any 4 six packs. My beer fridge is stocked. Come on over for a bevvy. Of course, my taps probably won't pour for another 6 months or so...
_______________________________
Part of the reason we have an ass-backwards energy policy is that people whose interests are solidly aligned with profits for industry are being paid to lie by the administration.