Newest Threads

Evan! · 07-18-2008, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adrock

Ever so slightly out of reach? That's quite an understatement! Converting to a carbon neutral society in a decade would so drastically change the economics of the U.S. in such a short time that you could bet on major economic collapse. Think about every manufacturing facility in the nation (many of which are already struggling) being forced to make large capital purchases to clean up their act. BTW, I don't believe they would clean up their act; I think they'd probably just move out of the country. Not to mention that U.S. automakers, one of the largest industries in the country, is not ready to roll out efficient carbon neutral vehicles on a large scale yet..........and if they were, to be truly carbon neutral, every family in the U.S. would have to buy one!

No argument on your point here technically, but let's not make it sound like Americans are the only society resistant to having their lifestyles mandated by government. Virtually everyone would have the same resistance.

+1000000 on all dat. Gore seems to operate in a vacuum where everyone would be willing to drastically, voluntarily lower their quality of life and watch the economy collapse even further. It's almost as if he just doesn't want to think about the external consequences of his proposals because it's too complex.

ArcaneXor · 07-18-2008, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evan!

...the former presidential candidate unveiled his "bold" plan to build a footbridge to Mars to get water!

Is he f*cking serious? I'm no true-blue Al Gore hater or anything, and I fully realize that our planet is in trouble, but...the biggest polluter on the planet converting to carbon-neutral in 10 years? He's got a better chance of converting everyone to atheism.

That's why so many environmental scientists, conservationists and ecologists have such a hard time with environmentalists and their wacky, counterproductive ideas. They've embraced Al Gore as their pseudo-deity, and he is increasingly influenced by them instead of reason.

Evan! · 07-18-2008, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ArcaneXor

That's why so many environmental scientists, conservationists and ecologists have such a hard time with environmentalists and their wacky, counterproductive ideas. They've embraced Al Gore as their pseudo-deity, and he is increasingly influenced by them instead of reason.

pseudo-deity? Methinks the "pseudo" part is unnecessary...

**Reverend JC** · 07-18-2008, 03:53 PM

How can you talk this way about the guy who invented pants?

FOR SHAME!!!!!!!!!

Thank you Al Gore for perpetuating the typical Liberal Whacko Stereo type. LOL, not only that but you are their leader.

This guy is a Brain Wizard for sure.

MikeFlynn74 · 07-18-2008, 06:04 PM

I thought he was talking about Energy production only. Not every factory in the US.

His goal is not unreachable in the least. But it takes collaboration from Greenies, Oil, Energy and the Government to do it.

Wind/Solar/tidal/Nuclear could have us off foreign oil for electricity production. That would take a sizeable chunk out of consuming which would dramatically lower prices of oil.

I dont see how this is a bad plan. We went from just barely having et engines to sending a car to the moon in a decade. Why cant we do this?

Evan! · 07-18-2008, 06:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeFlynn74

Why cant we do this?

you answered your own question:

Quote:

it takes collaboration from Greenies, Oil, Energy and the Government to do it.

MikeFlynn74 · 07-18-2008, 06:15 PM

Well duh- It was more of a statement.

I cant believe the greenies dont want wind power. That just "blows"

98EXL · 07-18-2008, 06:43 PM

where can I get the drugs he is on...they sound fantastic to me! C'mon guys, I'm super cereal!

Donasay · 07-18-2008, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adrock

Ever so slightly out of reach? That's quite an understatement! Converting to a carbon neutral society in a decade would so drastically change the economics of the U.S. in such a short time that you could bet on major economic collapse. Think about every manufacturing facility in the nation (many of which are already struggling) being forced to make large capital purchases to clean up their act. BTW, I don't believe they would clean up their act; I think they'd probably just move out of the country. Not to mention that U.S. automakers, one of the largest industries in the country, is not ready to roll out efficient carbon neutral vehicles on a large scale yet..........and if they were, to be truly carbon neutral, every family in the U.S. would have to buy one!
.

Ever so slightly out of reach, yes actually it could be done, but the government would have to spend a LOT of money on the technology and re-training all of the workers who will have to adjust to the new economy. The speech draws certain paralells to a speech given in 1962 about a certain other goal that was also ever so slightly out of reach:

In a 1962 speech given at Rice University in Houston, Texas, President John F. Kennedy reaffirmed America's commitment to landing a man on the moon before the end of the 1960s. The President spoke in philosophical terms about the need to solve the mysteries of space and also defended the enormous expense of the space program.

I bet on major economic collapse today even without the addition of having to be carbon neutral. Although many people don't want to hear it, the only way for us to not totally screw up the finances in this country over the upcoming retirement boom and leave huge debt for the next couple generations is to raise taxes and cut spending at the same time, but that will never happen.

noisy123 · 07-18-2008, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeFlynn74

I thought he was talking about Energy production only. Not every factory in the US.

His goal is not unreachable in the least. But it takes collaboration from Greenies, Oil, Energy and the Government to do it.

Wind/Solar/tidal/Nuclear could have us off foreign oil for electricity production. That would take a sizeable chunk out of consuming which would dramatically lower prices of oil.

I dont see how this is a bad plan. We went from just barely having et engines to sending a car to the moon in a decade. Why cant we do this?

There is no reason it can't be done. In fact it will be, but thanks to the oil/fossil-fuel sector essentially controlling the dialog in this country, it will be happening elsewhere. A major government investment in nuclear power, along with an end to the shell games that is the regulation of the construction of plants, would almost single-handedly produce carbon neutrality. My only suggestion would be to keep the waste somewhere industry can get to it easily. A number of the isotopes in "waste" will be vital to future industrial efforts.