New
#11
True, but we are using too much of it. Cars that do less than 50MpG should be outlawed and a high speed train infrastructure should be developed.it will take YEARS and meanwhile we are just going to continue to use Oil.
Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill
-
-
New #12
Cars that get 50 mpg plus are small and light. It is proven these cars are not as safe in impacts, even with another small car. They certainly are not as good for interstate/autobahn travel as are larger heavier cars. I for one do not want an econobox.
High speed rail service would be nice; but considering the size of the US, the expenditure would be enormous. It would take 10 to 15 years just to get an environmental impact study done. And the environmentalists would howl if additional road beds had to be constructed.
-
New #13
Hi there
Maybe -- but we are TODAY and that is TOMORROW -- until policies are in place enabling us to get from TODAY to TOMORROW then we are just going to have to live with it.
I'm currently working in the UK at the moment which has possibly the HIGHEST Gasoline price in the world and it still doesn't stop people driving - they NEED their cars. Public transport just isn't appropriate for lightly populated rural areas either. (Fortunately I use LPG which keeps the cost significantly lower).
What DOES suprise me that during their ENTIRE Election campaign the 3 Major Political parties here have rarely mentioned Future Energy developments and how they would be supplied - but you hear such things as "Tax Credits" for Everybody even if they are earning 500,000 GBP a year etc etc.
OK it's THEIR election -- I'm sure the same lack of energy planning requirements would take place in any other country going to the Polls too.
The world has just gone (or is still in) SEVERE RECESSION -- nobody is going to do anything to hinder the fragile recovery taking place just yet.
In any case Trains etc don't just come out of Thin air -- these require HUGE manufacturing plants -- all with Heavy polluting metals etc.
The tracks can disfigure the Landscape severely whilst under construction and where does the Energy come from to power the trains -- You might be able to have a Solar powered train in the Nevada Desert but that's not possible in most of Europe -- and we certainly don't want yet more DANGEROUS Nuclear Power stations.
Cheers
jimbo
-
New #14
Having concerns regarding our environment isn't "getting up on a soapbox" at all. I think we can all agree that oil leaking into our oceans is potentially catastrophic. For the most part, I think the tree huggers are rediculous, but this is a different thing altogether. Our oceans support life on earth for every living thing on the planet, in one way or another. We should take our responsibility concerning our oceans serious, don't you think?
-
New #15
Havn't people died trying to secure deep sea oil rigs ? And other operations ? I remember reading some place, that the technology used in deep sea/sufficient oil rigs needs to be as complex technology wise than that of Space research, probably bull, but perhaps companies should invest more in the technologies which prevent such catastrophes, especially since, you know, a mess up DESTROYS THE EARTHS ENVIRONMENT ?
BP say they have to under control...My reply would be, no they don't.
The clean up is going to cost millions, and since BP and Transocean make billions I'm pretty sure they can fork that out...but they won't so. Dunno, beyond my power, I won't even bother making myself less ignorant, will make me depressed.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...417936798.html
Link about the absent "Acoustic safe guard device" from the American/BP rig.Last edited by Pieloi; 01 May 2010 at 17:18.
-
New #16
Hi there
OF COURSE - BUT until as I've posted - Governments make it reasonable and decently economically viable to use alternative energy we are just going to keep relying on Oil until it really does become impossible to extract any more and OF COURSE oil companies don't want to pollute the environment either -- apart from bad publicity and ENORMOUS costs -- BP is going to have to Pony Up several BILLION DOLLARS on this one BTW.
President OBAMA will ensure of course that BP as the main contractor for the Rig will cough up. Unlike others in the pay of the Oil companies (Ex President Bush springs to mind) I trust OBAMA on this one.
BP WILL pay up you can be sure of that.
I've just seen a perfectly good site for "Bio Fuels" refused planning permission to operate in Lincolnshire UK for no good reason -- area not densly populated, no noise, smell etc etc other than the Local Authority had absolutely no idea how the plant would work and thought it was "a Refinery".
Of course the work was transferred to Holland -- eventually the site will have over 1100 GOOD LONG TERM SKILLED Jobs.
And I still say the record of most Oil Companies is reasonably good with the few exceptions I've posted about earlier in this thread.
For sheer waste and landfill pollution just think what each WALMART store chucks out EVERY DAY.
If Shell wasted even 1/100 of what Walmart does then you really WOULD have a polluted planet.
Cheers
jimbo
-
New #17
I agree that more research should be done with bio fuels. But oil is big business, and it seems to me that the governments want to keep it going for that very reason....the revenues. You would think with the technology we have today, that the alternative energy sources would have been discovered already, and implimented. I'm thinking it all boils down to the almighty dollar.
-
New #18
Not to mention that the U.S needs to address the problems with it's infrastructures. They are erroding away, and need to be fixed before any kind of mass rail service is explored. Our roads, bridges, and underground piping is literally busting at the seems. Have you been watching the Discovery Channel that has documented this big mess? It's quite alarming, Bro. Our roadways are a big part of what made America the great nation it is today. Without them, commerce grinds to a halt.
-
New #19
I would say that roads disfigure landscapes just as much if not more. And yes, trains need energy too. But on a per passenger mile they are many times more effivient than cars or planes. And the cost argument I do not buy. That is only a matter of priorities. If a country like France can do it, the US could do it too.The tracks can disfigure the Landscape severely whilst under construction and where does the Energy come from to power the trains
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJfDWtbioEM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_efficiency_in_transportation
-
New #20
Quote
Related Discussions