ALIGN, BABY! ALIGN!
ALIGN, BABY! ALIGN!
Where was this picture taken? Tell us in the Comments
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: 80schild
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous YODA GRAMMAR | Wall Street gang Next »
» 240 comments
-
Recent Comments
I want to beat EWAda… on TRAIN ORIGAMI Rattus on WOOPS Danbala on Let’s imagine the look o… Ivan The Patron Sain… on TRAIN ORIGAMI Nucky, the Official … on TRAIN ORIGAMI The Steve on Let’s imagine the look o… The Steve on Let’s imagine the look o… mabsba on TRAIN ORIGAMI Nucky, the Official … on TRAIN ORIGAMI mabsba on WOOPS 
Cheezburger Network Blog
How about “split, baby! split!” for nuclear power.
It works really well because if you’re not using enough protection then there can be long term consequences.
Nooooo, because you don’t want to SPLIT, you want to FUSE. Nuclear fusion: it’s awesome! Creates less waste than fission, and the supply of fuel (hydrogen atoms) is enough to last us millennia. More money should go to figuring out how to control fusion reactions in a contained area, damnit.
Good point, but fusion is HARD. Seriously hard. Fusing plasma is rather hot. Like, melt through any conceivable substance in nanoseconds hot. So you need to spend lots of energy containing it with electromagnets. Which has always taken far more energy than it produces.
We will get there, eventually, but in the mean time, there are cheaper, safer, less polluting ways of doing fusion. Thorium reactors can’t be weaponized. Pebble bed reactors simply stop when they break down. Look up ‘generation iv reactors’ on wiki for an overview of the new fusion tech.
This is coming from a greeny who used to protest against nuclear. We can do it safely now, if we can get over our aversion to all things nuclear.
You’re so cute when you’re making sense
Except I meant to say, “Cheaper ways of doing _fission_” of course…
Fuse baby, fuse…
You;re just cute all the time
Giggidity Goo, Awwwwright… *hugs*
You said ‘hard’. *sniggers ’cause is twelve*
You’re right. This is why more money should indeed go to research, as I said
France can do it. We can do it too, if we can just get over our aversion to all things French
Like not bathing and body odor
They do wash! It’s just that they all smoke like chimneys…
Anyway, if we didn’t have the french, we wouldn’t have french assistants in schools. Then who would students endlessly gossip about?
(JULIEN! we love you!)
My last name is French. Don’t hate my frog blood!!! T_T
Are you related to Julien?
No, no I’m not.
“Drill, baby, drill,” can also apply to geothermal heating/ cooling.
I also liked that T-shirt that was on the right for a while with “Drill, baby, Drill” written on it and McCain slamming Palin doggie-style.
We need one that shows Obama doing Ol Joe Biden
What kind of catchy slogan would you set under that then?
“Well, he’s gotta serve SOME purpose.”
“Stick it to the Man”
I think the slogan would be “Mmmmmff! *Gurgle* *Spit*”
Please tell me where I can get bleach for the mind’s eye
That’s icky…
The merits of green energy speak for themselves. No need to resort to catch slogans to get the point across. Unless of course you want to make them up for fun anyway.
You need catchy slogans to get the point across to people who are too lazy to research the merits. See also: morons.
We can see a number of them if we just wait for all the “hippie haters” to post.
You damn hippies with your TREES and your OWLS!!!!
Orly?
O’Reilly?
Be glad we saved the spotted owl. You can make a high quality biodiesel out of spotted owl squeezings.
Poor owls. First you guys want to squeeze my nuts for fuel and now the owls!?
Not to mention the ORLY pics.
Might I just ask how this gets us off oil? I mean…100 percent of the 250 million cars on the road in the US run on gas or diesel. Not electricity…1.1% of the nations power is generated with oil (click my name for info). And the vast majority of that amount is generated in Hawaii. You can’t exactly run a car on solar power yet. And even when fully electric cars start coming down the pipe, it’s going to take over 2 decades to get even half the gas burning cars off the road. If not longer. You guys want to start giving some real world solutions, or are you just going to keep repeating propaganda and calling everyone who disagrees with you stupid?
Thanks for the gloom & doom. Hydrogen cars and better electric cars are already on the way in the next few years. Last I checked, fossil fuels aren’t only used for transportation. Solar, wind, nuclear, geothermal, etc CAN already be used for heating and powering homes, if we’d only take advantage of them.
You can’t expect an instantaneous solution, you have to start somewhere. What’s with this all or nothing BS?
Marry me?
Dibs on honeymoon footage…
*sigh*
*quirks eyebrow*
So you like purring but a soft feminine sigh only gets a quirked brow?
Well considering the variety of sighs, I thought it best to show apprehension before you quantified what kind of sigh it was. I am paranoid like that. Sorry love. -_-
No, you’re just too smart for your own good, because I was indeed spinning it like I was sighing softly while I was actually sighing about your typical heterosexual male display of asking for lesbian honeymoon footage
While in reality, I’m obviously flattered
Woot!!! *hugs tight*
Thanks for the proposal. My husband might object tho.
minerva146 <– girl
my husband might line up for the honeymoon footage too though, I supose.
Awesome.
A lot of it has to do with the impossible timelines set forth by some in the Democratic party. We can’t eliminate the need for foreign oil in ten years without drilling the crap out of America. We can’t eliminate the need for fossil fuels in ten years unless you live in The Matrix. You’ve got a lot of whackos out there spouting the nonsense that we either stop using oil now or die, and it’s got a lot of people on my side whipped up into a frenzy. Without the scare tactics I think there would be a lot more consensus on both sides. IT’s also extremely expensive in some cases to retrofit houses for geothermal, solar, wind, and other sources of energy, so someone telling me that I’m going to be made to do it before long kind of pisses me off. Let’s gently wean, not go cold turkey.
In other words, you’re saying “No we can’t! No we can’t!”
I agree that 10 years is pretty aggressive. But we sent several men to the moon in less than 10 years, 40 years ago. We made it a national priority, and we did it. If we put our minds to it, we can do the same with energy (though admittedly probably not in 10 years).
Sending a few men to the moon while amazing and masterful and wonderful, isn’t converting an entire country to alternative sources of energy. It’s strapping a booster rocket to someone’s ass and lighting it
I say let the market figure it out, because necessity is the soul of invention. If there is a true need for it, meaning there is no other way to get from point A to point B, then someone will invent a cheap efficient way of getting there. That’s what led to the development of the car in the first place, and the subsequent improvements on it. 
Because “letting the market figure it out” is working SOOO well in SOO many other areas…
It’s not being allowed to work. When you have a bastardized socialistic-capitalistic system that socalizes the problems while giving the profits to a few people at the top, you aren’t allowing the market to work. In the case of the bailout, those banks should have been allowed to fail. Then they could have been sold off in pieces to banks that have better balance sheets and aren’t cooking the numbers, and something new and better could have taken its place. Like I said, necessity is the soul of invention. If you need it, you will create it. If someone gives you everything according to how THEY feel it will work, then you’re just going to languish in medeocrity your entire life.
You can be my Secretary of Fiscal Logic and Responsibility when I win the presidency on the Issue Beatings platform.
Sweet! Can Ema be the Secretary of Responsibility and Niceties?
Sure… *withholds the In Bed, out of respect for ema*
I plan to have a multiparty cabinet. They go very nice with the china and silver in the cabinet. Max can be my VP, Herb can be my Secretary of making sure I make sense. n8 will be my Secretary of Risk. Lynn can be my Lap Secretary. Jane can be my Secretary of Blunt Force Trauma, otherwise known as debating.
I might have to think this out and make a proper memo.
Car companies knew within three years of researching, in the early ’90s, hydrogen fuel cells that they were impractical for automobiles. However, they continue to throw money at the technology, even though they know it won’t work, to pretend like they have something to show for themselves when asked what they are doing to stop our dependence on oil.
I personally wouldn’t put any money on hydrogen fuel cells being in cars any time soon.
As for electric cars, you are going to have to convince all the major auto makers to redesign the engine, like the Tesla company did. As far as American automakers go, doing that would bankrupt them. There is an engine that can work entirely on electricity, however, the auto factories are not equipped to build one. And most cars are not designed to employ that type of power. So on top of redesigning the engine, the entire car would have to be redesigned. Maybe some foreign companies have the money available to do that, but again, it would just put the American companies out of business even faster than the rate they are going.
Please cite a source on your “Car companies knew” statement. As far as I’m aware, car companies are still researching hydrogen fuel cells. See PEM membranes. Hydrogen fuel cells ALREADY EXIST and ALREADY WORK. The problem is, where do we get the hydrogen?
The obvious answer is “from hydrolyzing water,” but the problem with that comes back to where do we get the energy to hydrolyze water?
And, like my comment above, what you’re saying is, “No we can’t! No we can’t!” Way to be optimistic. Yes, clearly American companies are totally incapable of making an electric/fuel cell car that works, so of course we should just keep going with the current paradigm. That’s a sure way to stay ahead of the curve. /sarcasm
I grew up in Detroit. My parents were researchers for the car companies and I over heard the conversations. They would never be allowed to publish the information and car companies never would either. I’m sorry if that isn’t a good enough source for you.
Second, I said that they are still throwing money at it. They are still researching it, even though they know that they will never employ it for themselves with in the next few years as the above person mentioned.
I know they exist. Again, read what I said. I said “impractical for automobiles.” Which is completely true.
And I never suggested to continue with the current paradigm. I’m a girl who grew up in Detroit and I’m being realistic with my expectations of American car companies. I’m not saying that we will never have an electric car. If you noticed, I mentioned one that is already in existence. I said that asking for the American car companies to do that would cause them to go belly up right now. I never said, “No we can’t!” I said, we can’t expect American car companies to do it. Especially now.
And I’d much rather be a realist than an optimist.
Check out http://www.ballard.com for a refutation of your “impractical for automobiles” claim.
It still requires them to redesign the engine. A hydrogen fuel cell does not work with a combustion engine. Thus, to use this technology is a way that is practical for automobiles it would require auto companies to not only redesign the engine, but completely retool the factories that make the cars. American car companies can’t even keep open the factories that make the combustion engine, so how are they going to afford replacing all the equipment for a redesign engine?
I guess what I mean was, impractical for automobiles as we know them. And impractical for American car companies to employ right now. Because doing o would bankrupt them.
Well that would be capitalism at work. The companies that cannot meet the needs of the market and their customers are doomed to die out. The market is needing something beyond what we have now. The companies have dug their hole, now they have to lie in it.
The way the current economy is, and the situation of a lot of people around me, I’ld like to at least try and keep some jobs here.
And the companies themselves are looking at the government and saying, “you bailed out those banks, can’t you help us out too?”
One could also say that the banks collapsing was capitalism at work and those companies dug their holes and should lie in them as well.
I am all for cleaner technology. But at the same time, Michigan is already in the porcelain throne as it is. It doesn’t need help with flushing.
There would be no “engine” if by engine you mean internal combustion. THat’s the point — fuel cells produce electricity. The engine would be replaced somehow by electric motors.
The fact that the factories have to retool is not relevant to this discussion.. We’re talking about long term here, not tomorrow. In the long term, oil will run out and whether they want to or not, factories will have to retool.
Motors are the engine, in a combustion engine and in an electric engine. I know the fuel cell product electricity, please do not belittle me. I’ve been saying all along that American car companies knew that they would have to completely redesign the engine that is used to propel and automobile forward and they have neither the resources or the desire to do so. In addition to the complete redesign of the engine, for it to be marketable to the public at a reasonable price, factories would have to be completely redesigned and retooled as well. The point about the long term is that, that is the only time frame that this kind of technology would be available to the public. Hydrogen fuel cells are not going to be on a mass market any time soon, as was originally suggesting. And I think that it is awesome that you care so much about the people who rely on these companies to put food on their table. It can’t always be about cleaner energy now, because if that is how it is going to be how you want it, then expect the unemployment rate to only continue to shoot up and prices continue to soar to the point where you aren’t even going to be able to afford the new and cleaner technology. There is a bigger picture outside of the environment, I wish you could see it.
Boris, let me tell you how this would work at my house. For about 20K I can get a grid tied solar system to power my home, and for about 40K I can get a Phoenix Motors electric truck which I can power with my home system. Right now I have an F-150 extended cab which gets about 14 mpg. That’s a lot of carbon emissions! I’m paying about $250 per month in electric bills. If I could get a low-interest loan for the 20 K to install the solar system, I could reduce or eliminate the electric bill and use that money to repay the loan. Then when the time comes to replace the current truck (and it will), I would jump at the chance to buy an electric vehicle which I could fuel myself at home!
All of this technology is available now. The problem comes in when I need to drive the truck up to the big city. There is a limit to how many miles I could drive on the current battery capacity of the EV. Between here and the big city there are many places to pump fossil fuels into the current truck, but none to serve the EV with clean electric. This is where business incentives come in handy, to encourage the development of things we all need. A tax incentive for businesses to provide electric facilities alongside gas and diesel would help people like me who seriously want to do something different.
In bed… >_>
Also don’t forget that you get money back from the power companies by adding electricity to the grid. A relative of mine has a solar/wind grid on their home… They get money FROM the electric company due to adding into the grid. :]
@ all naysayers : Also, what about the hydrogen cars that are already running and functional in CAL? Oh yes, and in england they have little solar powered hydrogen fuel stations on a loop of road for hydrogen car testing. it’s possible, easy, and cheap. Other countries already have the tech.
yes to power the whole coutry we would have to cover every square mile of land with these. Great idea
*catchy
Lame, Baby, Lame !
I concur.
i concur also, little less subliminal would b good
and a little more oral.
stupid solar power … no one makes money off the freakin SUN!!! We want to continue dependence on oil and keep sending all of our money to the middle east for oil and WAR!!!
LAME LAME LAME renewable energy …. we HATES it!
I’m pretty sure it’s just because the caption is lame. ;P
Hey, they did admit it’s not as catchy as “drill baby, drill”.
Can’t wait until these solve all of our problems! Expect for planes…. and cloudy days… and plastics manufacturing… and the extreme cost… and…
That’s why solar panels aren’t the only part of the solution. Add geothermal, wind, solar towers, tidal and other hydroelectric.
You forgot nuclear power. Point is that oil isn’t going to instantly vanish for all the uses it currently has. We need to pull production back to the US in the interim.
I forgot nothing of the sort. Nuclear has waste that needs to be safely stored for a period of time several times longer than all of human history thus far.
Hahaha, I see you’ve been indoctrinated by Sierra Club propaganda.
I see you never studied Science and radioactive half lives…
Gah! Thank you!
*sigh*
Nearly all the material in a spent fuel rod is recyclable or easily handled. Ninety-five percent of a spent fuel rod is U-238 — the same natural uranium that comes out of the ground.
So why are we do we need Yucca Mountain, a huge repository designed to “bury” 77,000 tons of “nuclear waste,” when 95 percent of the material is non-fissioning natural uranium? We’re doing it because in 1976, Jimmy Carter outlawed the reprocessing of spent fuel. Instead of treating it in an environmentally efficient way and recycling, we ended up with huge, mixed-up gobs of material that we can’t think of anything to do with except “throw it away.”
The French have complete recycling. All of France’s nuclear waste from 25 years of producing 75 percent of its electricity is stored beneath the floor of one room at Le Hague. The lifetime output for each French citizen would fit in a soda can. That’s what the incredible energy density of nuclear power can do for the environment.
Do your homework.
‘Regular’ uranium isn’t radioactive, but it’s still *toxic* since it’s a heavy metal.
I’d like to see your source, if you don’t mind. I am intrigued (being a science geek plus having majored in science and biology).
Guinny, I am so infatuated with you right about now. A liberal science geek girl who likes a little bdsm, jeez, do you also turn into a pizza and a six pack at midnight?
No, but I like to eat pizza at midnight… does that count too?
Hee! I caused infatuation! *does dance*
Also, when you say it like that, I sound a bit strange.
BDSM is perhaps THE most common kink in the world. I’ve only met a few women who dislike being held down, getting spanked, a little hair pulling, and so forth. Being liberal isn’t weird either, despite what the right would have you believe. Being a science nerd is a little weird, but in a good way. Where would we be without the women of science, from Ada Lovelace and Marie Curie back in the day up through Jane Goodall and Grace Hopper more recently? Yeah, I threw in two programmers, that is my field.
–
Smart women are HOT!
Yes, yes they are. Now I have to make plans that I shouldn’t discuss in public but probably will anyway.
Source: William Tucker – terrestrialenergy.org
Also, my family is in the nuclear power industry. The lack of misinformation out there is astonishing. Nuclear experts knew this all along but nobody ever listens to them. Instead it’s the Naders and Sierra Clubs of the world who get the mic.
err, make that “the AMOUNT of misinformation…”
I liked ‘the lack’. It’s the world I’d like to live in *sad face*
Thanks for the link! I’m going to dig into that when I get home from work!
Actually, U-238 is slightly radioactive, with a halflife of 4.47e9 years. Granted, that is not VERY radioactive and I would have no problem sitting a lump of it on my desk for years. U-235 is somewhat more radioactive, halflife is 7.04e8 years.
Both are dangerous as heavy metals. Probably more so than because of their radioactivity, but it would depend on the situation.
And from what I understand (being a chemical/environmental engineer, but not involved in the nuclear industry), Daft Punk is correct. France recycles almost all of their nuclear materials in breeder reactors. The reason Carter outlawed those is because they produce plutonium, and ZOMG THE TERRISTS. Personally, I think that decision needs to be revisited with the most current knowledge and research applied to the problem.
I’m well aware that nuclear ‘waste’ could be recycled, but even the most advanced techniques only recycle two or three times. There is still waste that needs to be stored for a long period of time, even if it is far less than would be required if current US laws on recycling were kept.
Or we could just get rid of 6 billion people, and the rest would live happily ever after with the existing resources.
And that is EXACTLY the point of the originators of “Sustainable
development”. Several have supported population targets of much less than 1 Billion. Very freaky.
Clean energy is a very GOOD thing ! But HUMAN LIFE is more important.
Maybe people should stop having so many babies.
The Hoover Dam supplies half of the mid west doesn’t it?
Yep, and Niagara Falls supplies much of the Northeast
Um, no. Hoover dam supplies approximately a max of 2.08 gigawatts. Not nearly enough to supply “half the mid west” unless you’re talking about a very selective “half” which doesn’t include any cities.
The Grand Coulee Dam in Washington is bigger, BTW.
If it was turned on all the way
Yeah, let’s just rely on fossil fuel, I hear there’s a few years worth under Alaksa and it’ll never be a few years from now. Problem solved!
there are nuts (actual tree nuts not crazy people) that grow in South America that can be pressed for usable fuel. There have already been airplane trials of it.
Lemme guess… these crushed nuts are not as cheap as jet fuel. And said trees would would be cultivated in place of plants that feed people.
I don’t mean to shit all over the concept… I mean, it could be a legitimate alternative, but at this point it reminds me of the idiotic ethanol boondoggle.
$48 a barrel – about 1/3 of jet fuel cost
Were the airplanes acquitted?
Nice!
The tail fins didn’t fit, they must acquit!!!
Ah, I’ve heard of these nuts, they are processing the seeds actually for biofuel because they produce a hell of a lot of seed oils. And now a few farmers are trying to grow them in the south for them to experiment with.
Isn’t Brazil running on sugarcane or something?
When jatropha seeds are crushed, the resulting jatropha oil can be processed to produce a high-quality biodiesel that can be used in a standard diesel car, while the residue can also be processed into biomass to power electricity plants.[1]
-
The plant yields more than four times as much fuel per hectare as soybean, and more than ten times that of maize (corn). A hectare of jatropha produces 1,892 litres of fuel.[2]
-
Researchers at Daimler Chrysler Research explored the use of jatropha oil for automotive use, concluding that although jatropha oil as fuel “has not yet reached optimal quality, … it already fulfills the EU norm for biodiesel quality”. Archer Daniels Midland Company, Bayer CropScience and Daimler AG have a joint project to develop jatropha as a biofuel[3]. Three Mercedes cars powered by Jatropha diesel have already put some 30,000 kilometres behind them. The project is supported by DaimlerChrysler and by the German Association for Investment and Development
-
Goldman Sachs recently cited Jatropha curcas as one of the best candidates for future biodiesel production.[4] However, despite its abundance and use as an oil and reclamation plant, none of the Jatropha species has been properly domesticated and, as a result, its productivity is variable, and the long-term impact of its large-scale use on soil quality and the environment is unknown.[5] However, because jatropha is not edible, and because it can grow in harsh climates, it can be planted in areas where it won’t compete for resources needed to grow food.[6]
I am immediately starting studies to find a way to press nuts (crazy people, not actual tree nuts) into usable fuel.
More fuel and cleaner forums! It’s a win/win!
Squishing nuts — it makes me nervous !
Q: So, Captain, what fuel does your new car run on?
A: Arrrr, it’s drivin’ me nuts!
Like a steering wheel in your pants?
More like a rudder.
How about “eco-freako liberals are frickin’ idiots.” That’s pretty catchy, too.
Hah hah hah hah hah! Oh hah hah hah ha- oh wait, you were serious. Hard of thinking, are you?
I’ll sure be an idiot once we run out of fossil fuel..
Well, if your statement was true, we’d have quite a while to wait. As it is, I believe you’ve misjudged the timeline in that you’ve already achieved that status.
yarrrrrr a pirate
So to sum up your attitude: “Everything’s fine, and everything’s going to continue to be fine, so just shut up and go shopping, dumbass!”
Yeah. What could possibly go wrong?
Sounds like a candidate for fnnkybutt ’s study about pressing nuts (crazy people) into useable fuel.
All those panels might power 2 houses… just maybe. Hell, it takes a 3′x5′ panel on a bright sunny day to power a blender.
That’s why they aren’t the only option.
All those panels might power a dozen houses… just maybe. Hell, a person could have a couple of those on their roof and have enough power for themselves with plenty spare to feed back into the grid.
Thank you.
My parents have 3 solar panels on their roof in Florida. Their electric bill is usually negative (the company doesn’t pay the credit)
They collect the energy during the day and it feeds into the grid, there is enough energy credit to power the house at night with some left over.
Not really- I almost went totally solar until I talked to my neighbor who did. Didn’t save any money and he was very disappointed with the battery backup. Offered to sell me his- after he told me all this.
It continues to amaze me that people base their opinions about things on the opinions of other people. Srsly.
So, to use an extreme example, if your neighbor had jumped off a high building and had told you that it was quite a trip and it didn’t hurt at all, really, you would jump too? Or is it just things people have to make an effort/investment for?
If he spent an hour telling me what a piece of junk his new car was, would I not be an idiot if I bought it ?
You would be an idiot if you bought that exact same car from your neighbor, yes. But the opinion of one person is no reason to shy away from the car brand itself. It’s entirely possible that he bought a dud.
If he states that his solar panel sucks, that would be true. If he stated that solar power sucks because his panel doesn’t work, then that is a broad generalization.
Methinks it depends on the quality of your panel. From what I’ve seen, a few panels – maybe even less – should power your house, no problem. I’m sure you can wind up with cheap ones that don’t work well if you’re not careful, though.
I have one of those panels on my roof. It supplies all our hot water for a family of four.
Actually, they are now producing panels capable of absorbing more than one wavelenghth of light, unlike the older panels. They are much more efficient, able to utilize more like 60% of the energy. However, they take longer to make, and are layered, so they cost ALOT more to make.(I looked into getting them installed on my barn roof. Right now, too expensive!) Still not perfect, but what is? Certainly not fossil fuels….
There’s a company in California right now that is in the final stages of developing a special kind of house paint that will act similar to a solar panel and it’s not much more expensive than regular house paint.
If we had a President and politicians who were more enthused about renewable energy sources and this method were perfected and kept cost effective (which becomes a lot easier when you’re subsidized and get good tax breaks like the oil companies), I’m sure it would only take a couple years to get most of the nation converted over to it…
Sure does, well accept at night, on cloudy days, smokey days if you live in Cali, when it gets dirty, or pretty much never in the Midwest.
Ya, in the Midwest, you go to wind power. We have plenty of that and it blows like your shoddy reasoning not to use renewables.
Like old forms of satellite TV! The only thing is, your logic is based on an extreme-right viewpoint. Solar’s not the only option, just like fossil fuel is not the only option. An even blend to ween us off of fossil fuels is the best option for everyone right now, both environmentally and economically.
Ideally it’s a combination of encouraging people to be less wasteful with current energies (carpool or combine car trips, turn down the AC, etc) while slowly but surely moving from fossil fuels to alternatives.
Hey I know, lets make a bunch of potato batteries and hook those up to the grid. I know it will only have a marginal power output but we’re showing everyone just how much we care about the environment and that’s really all that matters.
Sure we could use a really useful solution like Nuclear to create a lot of new jobs in generation and recycling spent materials and decrease carbon output and dependence on oil but we spent the last 30 years demonizing it so it doesn’t really matter that France and other European countries efficiently use it to decrease carbon output and provide a stable, renewable grid.
BTW stop using the tern fossil fuel, you sound like idiots, oil is abiotic, its proven, its not dead dinosaurs. NASA proved it in 2005 with the discovery of abiotic methane on Saturn in the Cassini mission. Hurry and look it up before the sun goes down and you lose power.
*sigh*
The term fossil fuel is just that, a term. It doesn’t mean that it’s made from dinosaurs. Oil consists of carbohydrates. I don’t know what the big deal is with abiotic methane, we have that right here as well. Not as much, granted, but still.
From the article that you must have read: “If the scientists have ruled out that biological processes created methane on Titan, why do petro-geologists still argue that natural gas on Earth is of biological origin?” Corsi asked.
For a scientist, that’s a dumb question. Methane producing bacteria are very common on Earth. The fact that abiotic methane exists does not mean that A. biotic methane doesnt, and B. that crude oil is automatically abiotic too.
So, excuse me, but YOU sound like an idiot for claiming that just because NASA found abiotic methane on Titan (not Saturn), that means that all oil on Earth is abiotic too.
Anyway. I also still want to point out that fossil fuel is a term, and even though it’s possible that it might, in the future, be proven to be incorrect, that doesn’t mean that the term should be changed or people are stupid for using it. I can’t think of any off the top of my head (it’s early) but there are dozens of terms that are still in use today even though they are outdated/superseded.
*cough* Hydrocarbons. Petroleum consists of hydrocarbons. Different from carbohydrates. I agree with the rest of your post, but correcting a post like that works better if you don’t make mistakes like that.
Oh dude, you’re so right! *cries*
Also, the dumbness of the mistake is even intensified because I would normally never make it. I blame my typing speed, my lack of sleep and the election.
Eh, it happens. I figured you’d be better off hearing it from somebody who agrees with you than some of these others who would feel the need to call you names.
Aww you so sweet *hugs*
Let alone the fact that dinosaurs aren’t the only fossils… Because there was life between now and then and it did fossilize.
Like McCain, fr’instance…
(sorry, couldn’t resist!)
I lol’d.
Plus according to Palin the dinosaurs have only been gone a few thousand years and were around in the time of man. That isn’t enough time to turn into oil. Or at least that is what they teach in the great Northwestern state of New Hampshire.
In bed…
Wait a minute… is this Jellybeans??!! If it is I love the new name!
Methane producing bacteria are very common on Earth.
And we have many in our intestines. So do cows. Did you hear that “some” say the warming climate is a direct result of farting cows?
While methane and other organic compounds can be made by abiotic means, they aren’t all abiotic. In fact, while oil doesn’t come from dinosaurs, it does mainly come from algae and zooplankton, which are obviously not abiotic sources. We’ve also known for a lot more than two years that methane could be produced by abiotic sources (heck, I’ve known that for about as long as I’ve known methane existed at all, and I learned it from a pretty old book), just as we’ve known for decades that methane exists on other planets.
As far as your main point goes, obviously solar isn’t the only solution. We will need to use a lot of different solutions, which will likely be different for each area. Solar works better in Arizona than it does in Seattle, but Seattle can use geothermal. Wind works better in the Plains states, and tidal would be useful in most coastal areas. Nuclear can be part of it too, but unless we solve the disposal problem, I don’t think we can really put all our eggs into that basket. I’d really like to see more work on fusion, and I’ve seen progress there recently, so we may be able to use a nuclear power source without the waste issue in the not-terribly-distant future.
As far as creating jobs goes, all of these options will create jobs in development, manufacturing and maintenance, so don’t act as if there will be tons of new jobs with nuclear but no jobs with anything else.
Solar power that can supply the country’s power needs is a pipe dream. Unless some of you tree huggers want to turn a couple national forests into solar panel farms.
Wut? There’s a huge amount of empty space in the Southwest and the plains for solar and/or wind. No need to chop down forests just yet.
Yeah, but solar power is hard to send far by power lines. You need to convert it to another energy source like hydrogen, etc. that can be stored and transported.
Is that only true for solar or does it also apply to wind?
With our current powerline infrastructure, a significant fraction of the electric power gets wasted in the process of transmitting it long distances (like more than a thousand miles). Upgrading the infrastructure would make it more efficient, and create a lot of skilled jobs.
Creating a significant power storage infrastructure is a massive task. There is a massive unemployment rate, hmmm
I don’t know of any practical systems for storing large quantities of power in the form of hydrogen.
In the desert bury large insulated tanks that can store very hot fluids. When you need power, use the heat to boil water and run a standard turbine. When you have extra power, heat up the fluid.
If there is a handy hill by the sea, create a salt lake high on the hill. Set up a hydroelectric power storage facility. Pump the water up the hill when you have extra power, run the turbines from the falling water when you need power.
Former deep underground mines can be used to store compressed air.
Solar power (once it’s converted to AC, which it would have to be to be used by anything in the current electricity infrastructure anyway) is not any harder to sent by power lines than power from any other source. All power generated and transmitted on those overhead power lines you see everywhere is in the form of AC power. AC power is AC power. The voltage may be varied depending on how far you’re transmitting the power, but it’s a solved problem, and power from solar panels, once it’s converted to AC, is absolutely no different than power from a generator coupled to a steam turbine.
In my opinion, hydrogen IS the future of energy storage, but we’re not there yet.
Alot of creatures live in those empty spaces ya know. They are just as beautiful, bio-diverse and worthy of preserving as forests. Same with the grasslands of the plains. I wouldn’t want to see them filled up with equipment.
Then we shouldn’t be drilling there either. We can set up facilities without destroying their environments.
True, but no one drills out here in Southwest AZ anyway!
I don’t know what the answer is, just wanting to point out that habitat could be destroyed the same as drilling and lots of folks would object.
Which is true and good, but still cleaner than oil fueling. Just need to get it done right the first time.
And I made a lol for all the Obama haters that I thought was funny. Click the name!!!
I’m an Obama-lover and I lol’d at your lol.
Thank you, I try.
Heee!
-loves-
Pretty good!
I wonder if it will get any votes since people are digging it.
Setting up solar panels or wind turbines would be less destructive to the environment if done in a flat desert compared to a forest. Not to mention solar and wind would be less destructive overall than drilling.
You clearly don’t understand the desert environment then. Lots of critters in the ground and it would probably have to be bulldozed destroying habitat. I don’t know how big a piece of land you would need to power a large city, but I bet it would be big. There are animals like the endangered spotted owl that live in the ground mostly and probably other animals would be affected by destroying food sources, bats come to mind.
Sweetie, I didn’t say it wouldn’t be destructive, I said it would be LESS destructive. Don’t condescend to me, I lived in AZ for 20+ years.
lol, I definetly don’t mean to condescend. But you are comparing apples and oranges by saying there would be LESS destruction, it’s just a different type of destruction. It may be necessary because there is more sun out here, but it would be ugly and destructive to a fragile environment. It would be better to see individual use of solar and wind instead of these mass expanses of land being chewed up by wind turbines and solar panels.
There are many options and they need to be investigated carefully. One doesn’t have to dive in headfirst, but one does have to start wading into the pool if there is going to be progress.
And nuclear power would be even less destructive. No one’s proposing that alternative energy be put on the shelf; the idea is that the drilling will get us to the point where the alt energy is ready, as it is NOT ready yet. The costs incurred would greatly outweigh the benefits if we jumped to alt energy immediately. The stupidity here lies in that for the most part, both sides are unwilling to utilize the bridge that’s handed to them in temporary drilling.
Are they as bio-diverse and worth protecting as the ANWR?
… You do realize that the best sunning areas are in the DESERT where there are no trees right? Right? Come on, you can’t be that stupid? Can ya? You’re joking me right? Right?
Enough with the Motifake shit! SERIOUSLY!
Nuclear? If you want nuclear, I have some farmland in the Ukrane to sell you. Near a town called “Chernyoble.”
A. Happened 22 years ago in a field that has major breakthroughs in safety every year or so.
B. Soviet nuclear plants did not have containment vessels like Western plants have.
C. Look into how the accident happened. It’s very interesting.
D. I don’t want to ask, but… are you republican by any chance?
Easy now. This Republican is all for nuclear energy as long as we carefully wean ourselves from fossil fuels slowly and quit acting like renewables are going to solve our problems overnight
Should have added a smilie, for I was making an inappropriate funny
I love inappropriate things! We should hang out!
Hanging out with a republican? *gasp*
You mean, you guys actually have FUN and stuff?!
Well, we do like that sheet with the hole in it, and have been known to (shhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!) take a drink or two…….oh, and we like rasing barns! That’s awesome!
LOL, froofrou, you rock!
She does, verily.
Am I the only one who would love to see an Ema & Froofrou vs. Guinny and Minerva tag team match? Wait, I can’t say that, I’m a PC liberal who refuses to objectify women! Bad Seth, bad!
It is okay, I will objectify them and you can pay me in secret for the video feed.
Bwahahaahaha!!! *cough* I mean. yessssss…
Are you gunning for a catfight or a pillow fight?
Also, objectify away. I don’t mind. Wait, I’m a strong,
intelligent woman who is better than that… Which is exactly why I don’t mind, so go right ahead!
Can it be both? Start with pillows and work towards ripping into clothes, etc. Mmm, good images going now.
Meow
Women like you girls help the stress of the day just by being yourselves. Thanks girls.
Welcome
We aim to please.
…in bed.
With a popcicle
brrrrrrrrrr!!
This is just getting better and better.
Froofrou and Ema, all joking aside, you two have helped me see Republicans
as fun and interesting people. Thanks so much for making it hard to dislike Republicans, what am I going to do for fun now?
There are always adorable puppies to kick
Nah, we could just beat random people instead. Puppies don’t deserve beatings but people usually do…
I could totally go for that!!!!
Of course, I am psychic like that.
Why hello lover. Meet the girls.
Hmmm, I see the computer still had her username when I typed from home… Great, now I look like I have a puppet. *headdesk*
LOL
I missed the whole thing
I’m sorry, you pretty much did. -_-
It’s pronounced “noo-kyoo-ler.” C’mon, at least -try- to get it right…!
That array would look a little awkward on your car…
So would an oil rig. You do understand the difference between power generation and power storage, right?
In bed…. Giggidy.
Oh, Seth. I lol’d.
Yes, there is a difference between power generation and power storage, but there is also a difference between chemical power storage and electrical power storage.
Batteries are great storage devices, but even if you fill up all the luggage space on a vehicle with batteries, you cannot equal the amount of power storage in about 5 gallons of gasoline.
A hydrogen fuel cell is the only thing that can match the range of a gasoline vehicle. Compared to gasoline, hydrogen is extremely unstable (think Hindenburg), and more difficult to store and transport (it would need to be under pressure to get enough in the vehicle without it being extremely large), and don’t forget about the problem of refueling your vehicle (hydrogen filling stations would need to be built).
And before you ask, you cannot crack hydrogen from water while you drive, it takes more energy to break hydrogen away from oxygen than you can get out of it.
There are also various metal hydrides which can release hydrogen (quite a lot of it, too!) under certain conditions. Perhaps in the future we’ll be shoveling hydride pellets into our “gas” tanks.
Ah, yes. That one field will power twenty, maybe even thirty whole AA batteries!
Ecologist: someone who went to college to learn how the planet works and how best to preserve it.
Environmentalist: someone who dropped out of college and lives off mom and dad while they protest the G8 summit.
Congrads, you win the hyperbole award!
it might give you power longer but it wont be MORE power… lots of little amounts of power over a longer period of time do not equal lots of power up front when you are trying to drive your car or heat your house.
spin, baby, spin! for wind power. Now if only we could get people to believe in them then we could get somewhere…
In bed.
Crap, someone hook O’Reilly up to a generator. His amount of spin might just save the world!
Rush is rather a windbag as well…
All we have to do is hook up the neo-con pundits, let them lie all day and power a nation!
That would require methane emission fuel technology.
Nothing against solar, wind, nuke, hydro, and non-food biomass.
But we’ve got 2 TRILLION barrels in the U.S or just offshore would last an awful long time.
That USGS figures. Yes, TRILLION.
Keep the money in the U.S., help the economy, proceeds go to Fed gov’t who owns much of the land thereby helping to balance the budget, create some jobs, become independent of Muslim nations who want to kill us (we ARE idolators to them … not that that is justification, just explanation)
There’s not much at stake here, say 1/4 recoverable ….it’s ONLY …. $80 / Barrel X 2 Trill / 4 =
…. oh that’s ONLY $40 TRILLION. No big deal.
Sheeesh.
You do know that of the oil we already drill, we EXPORT a lot of.
“We currently export 9 times what increased offshore drilling is estimated to produce at its peak. Markey points out that by the time the first offshore rig produced the first drop of oil, we’ll have exported 40% of the estimated reserves in protected areas offshore.”
Source is above. Site appears to be bi- or non-partisan.
That’s cuz we get it from Canada so blasted cheap (thanks to NAFTA). And, of course, the whole “oil is a global commodity” thing.
This is more of a statement than an lol, but it is still pretty funny.
And to participate in the discussion: yes, I do think we should seriously consider nuclear power.
I say, DRILL BABY DRILL and SPLIT BABY SPLIT.
The caption is total BS (Barbara Streisand). You can drill 24/7 but you can only get solar between dawn and dusk. And the number of hours of electricity you get depend on weather patterns, latitude, and season. As long as you don’t need energy between sundown and sunrise, solar is the way to go. Otherwise drill and split are the ways to go, baby.
You can actually get enough energy from the sun stored up to run through the night with the proper types of panels. There are others here more researched in the matter and I will defer to their information in addressing you further.
This was sort of a big “DUH” already if Mickey had read the rest of the thread.
That’s about enough to run your 2.4 Ghz Pentium Duo-Core…
During the DAY, at least.
Yea, gimme more CLEAN energy!
Solar is ineffective for any area of high population density-won’t work for the SF and LAs of the world. Nuclear is a much better option. “Green” energy is ineffective, expensive, and inadequate, in most cases.
But how safe would a nuclear plant be, where 8.0+ earthquakes are a real possibility?
.
For LA, I would advocate solar panels arrays or solar towers in the western parts of the Mojave Desert.
For SF, hydro electric power from the Sacramento River Delta, as well as possibly wind power (I’m not sure how practical this one is).
For both locations, look into the possibility of geothermal. The Mojave is probably the best location, but other locations would have to be a decent distance away from the fault line no matter what.
IT´S TRUE!
Wow. Dude. Overkill.
because he swore it got caught by the mods. when he didn’t see it come up, i’m guessing he just kept posting.
it happens. no need to jump in his sh*t for it though.
Whoops, yep, I thought they died a certain death w/ the mods. Apparently my dumb joke was worth nine tries to post. :-/ Mods, kindly clean up after my mess.
There was no jumping. I’m totally mellow. No harm, no foul.
All’s fair in lolcats and lolotics.