Am I a Liberal?

[walt]

Bet you would have cornered the buggy whip market.

Great line. You must have had a good night's sleep.

All breakthroughs require a lot of time and a lot of resources--note your PhD says it's loads of time away. And the key requirement is that scarcest of all resources, vision. This of course being that rare ability to look forward and not back.

Who, in the 60's could have foreseen the revolution in communications and computerization? Assuming that things will always be as they are now is foolish. As someone earlier (Walt?) noted, think if we had started developing ideas and investing in research back when Carter proposed this, where would we be now?

I think its much more than just a time, resource, and vision thing. You're up against some heavy entrenched interests, which can, and will, buy either political party

Here's something I just ran across in Jane Eliot's 1985 "History of Western Railroads"

Starting in 1938, a consortiun composed of General Motors, Firestone Rubber and Standard Oil bought all the city streetcar and inter-urbal transit lines in over 40 of Americas largest cities, including Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, and New York. They promptly scrapped the lines, replacing the trains with GM buses, running on Firestone tires, powered by Standard Oil fuels.

"In 1949, a federal jury in Chicago convicted GM of criminal conspiracy with Firestone and Standard Oil to replace electric rail transportation with buses for the purpose of monopolizing the sale of buses and related products. The conviction, however, did nothing to halt the continuing destruction of electric rail systems. GM was fined $5000, and the GM executive who played the key roll was fined one dollar."

"The transportation void left by the destruction of the clean, efficient electric railways was filled by millions of smog-producing automobiles that daily jam the Los Angeles system of freeways."

Looks like one of our "breakthroughs" already existed in the '40s but got gobbled up by the robber barrons while the govt doled out one-dollar fines. To again make something like alternate energy and transportation stick would require consistent consumer demand and vigilance which we don't currently have. You can forget all that placebo bull from govt and industry about their support and research. Its all just PR. Their money's still on "buggy whips", and their ad budgets and lobbyists will do their best to keep it that way. (How else to explain the SUV?)

For more on this subject, you might also review "The Power Broker", a classic about Robert Moses in NY. Great source material about the vested interests and struggles behind his construction of the NY State Thruway system vs light rail.
:cheers:

[mrba]

Bet you would have cornered the buggy whip market.
All breakthroughs require a lot of time and a lot of resources--note your PhD says it's loads of time away. And the key requirement is that scarcest of all resources, vision. This of course being that rare ability to look forward and not back.
Who, in the 60's could have foreseen the revolution in communications and computerization? Assuming that things will always be as they are now is foolish. As someone earlier (Walt?) noted, think if we had started developing ideas and investing in research back when Carter proposed this, where would we be now?

I am looking forward when I say power cell technology is not nirvana. Not now. Not in 25 years. The problem with PC is making them work efficiently.

Unless you have some ideas from Star Trek this is a long way away.

[shanbaum]

I am looking forward when I say power cell technology is not nirvana. Not now. Not in 25 years. The problem with PC is making them work efficiently.

Unless you have some ideas from Star Trek this is a long way away.

Well, I guess that's it, then.

[chm2023]

I am looking forward when I say power cell technology is not nirvana. Not now. Not in 25 years. The problem with PC is making them work efficiently.

Unless you have some ideas from Star Trek this is a long way away.

My assumption is that there are many, many people with much, much more talent that I have, who will be able to solve this problem. Which may be a perspective you lack.

IMO, what's missing is the leadership and the will to address a significant, complex and long term problem. (See Bush/Cheney--of course if they started down this road, who would deal with banning gay marriage and stem cell research; how much can 2 men do???)

The list of "insurmountable" problems that have been surmounted over time is lengthy, and a tribute to our modest species. Do not despair.

[mrba]

My assumption is that there are many, many people with much, much more talent that I have, who will be able to solve this problem. Which may be a perspective you lack.

Please Identify the basic assumptions that lead you to that one.

The list of "insurmountable" problems that have been surmounted over time is lengthy, and a tribute to our modest species. Do not despair.

You are equating computer tech advances, communications tech, medicine etc, to something a little more advanced, like changing laws of physics. Specifically conservation of energy. mAybe these are the physics you believe in to uphold your first assumption?

http://www.gshotts.com/HUMOR/cartoonphysics.htm

I redirect you to my Star Trek comment.

Or if you would like some reality,

http://www.srikant.org/core/node4.ht...00000000000000

[Spexvet]

To again make something like alternate energy and transportation stick would require consistent consumer demand and vigilance which we don't currently have.

I agree. So do we give up or make it happen?

[chm2023]

I agree. So do we give up or make it happen?

We don't have a choice, do we? Extrapolating our rate of fossil fuel consumption based on population and rate of development/industrialization,we will, in this century, be no longer living on the interest, but eating into the principal. Add to that the political implications of continuing to be held hostage by our oil jones, and the pollution factor--well, sitting back and doing nothing is a dangerous and immoral course.

I keep hammering on the need for leadership, but it's the key. Most people can't see the forest for the trees--re-read this thread--and consider the energy situation in very limited terms: today's price of gas, today's pollution etc. The scope of the problem needs to be articulated and someone (s) needs to lead the public to the inevitable conclusion that the current model ain't gonna last forever, and forever is getting closer all the time.

[mrba]

We don't have a choice, do we? Extrapolating our rate of fossil fuel consumption based on population and rate of development/industrialization,we will, in this century, be no longer living on the interest, but eating into the principal. Add to that the political implications of continuing to be held hostage by our oil jones, and the pollution factor--well, sitting back and doing nothing is a dangerous and immoral course.

I keep hammering on the need for leadership, but it's the key. Most people can't see the forest for the trees--re-read this thread--and consider the energy situation in very limited terms: today's price of gas, today's pollution etc. The scope of the problem needs to be articulated and someone (s) needs to lead the public to the inevitable conclusion that the current model ain't gonna last forever, and forever is getting closer all the time.

I think what you are missing is that there is no good solution.

[walt]

I agree. So do we give up or make it happen?

It's all about the MONEY.

Keep placing orders for foreign hybrids, and either Detroit will have to conform, or Big Oil will get the gov. to outlaw 'em.

[chm2023]

I think what you are missing is that there is no good solution.

And what you are lacking is historic perspective. Every generation feels that their problems are unique and pose difficulties greater than those ever before seen, or overcome. The advantage to this POV is that it allows very normal, insignificant people to feel they are remarkable by virtue of living in and surviving extraordinary times.

Pick up a biography of Captain Cook and ponder the meaning of insurmountable.

P.S. My brother has a Prius. I hate to break it to him that he is breaking the laws of physics. Golly, what's the penalty for that!!!!

[shanbaum]

Now, chm, stop picking on mrba. He said he heard a Ph.D. say - on the radio, mind you - that there's no solution, so, that's good enough for me. Fill 'er up?

[chm2023]

Now, chm, stop picking on mrba. He said he heard a Ph.D. say - on the radio, mind you - that there's no solution, so, that's good enough for me. Fill 'er up?

I know, I know. There but for the grace of God.

[mrba]

Now, chm, stop picking on mrba. He said he heard a Ph.D. say - on the radio, mind you - that there's no solution, so, that's good enough for me. Fill 'er up?

There is ultamately no solution. 1. Fossil fuel is not a renewable resource (Prius or not chm). 2.No other source of fuel can sustain the world's consumption, and if it could it would not be renewable. 3. In order to have this magic bullet you all aspire to, you would have to have new physical laws or break the old ones. 4. You equate this innovation with previous ones that are not applicable.

And for your information Dr. Watenberg is the Radio PHD...

http://www.kgoam810.com/djadditional....asp?djid=3552

[chm2023]

There is ultamately no solution. 1. Fossil fuel is not a renewable resource (Prius or not chm). 2.No other source of fuel can sustain the world's consumption, and if it could it would not be renewable. 3. In order to have this magic bullet you all aspire to, you would have to have new physical laws or break the old ones. 4. You equate this innovation with previous ones that are not applicable.

And for your information Dr. Watenberg is the Radio PHD...

http://www.kgoam810.com/djadditional....asp?djid=3552

Got it, fossil fuel not renewable, no replacement for fossil fuel, therefore we're doomed. Imagine me on a rainy Monday afternoon getting the news on Armageddon from a person who seriously refers to himself as "badass" on OptiBoard.

I must confess I would have liked something more solemn and, well, spelt correctly, but we don't have control over our fate, do we?

[walt]

Got it, fossil fuel not renewable, no replacement for fossil fuel, therefore we're doomed. Imagine me on a rainy Monday afternoon getting the news on Armageddon from a person who seriously refers to himself as "badass" on OptiBoard.

Personally thought the name showed more flair than something as prosaic as chm2023. Now, if you had used something a little more creative like chm2024 or 2025, you might have been onto something. :hammer:

[mrba]

Monday afternoon getting the news on Armageddon from a person who seriously refers to himself as "badass" on OptiBoard.

I refer to myself as Scott or mrba, but not "badass". You didn't get it. There is no silver bullet. Thats the point. There was a very interesting article on liquifying natural gas and transporting it in tankers in the WSJ Friday. Just FYI.

Note to reader: I am getting lectured to for not being open to original thought by someone who refers to themself as "chm".

[chm2023]

I refer to myself as Scott or mrba, but not "badass". You didn't get it. There is no silver bullet. Thats the point. There was a very interesting article on liquifying natural gas and transporting it in tankers in the WSJ Friday. Just FYI.

Note to reader: I am getting lectured to for not being open to original thought by someone who refers to themself as "chm".

You stated, and I quote: "There is ultamately (sic) no solution". Which is different than saying there is no silver bullet. Nuance, little one, nuance.

Shanbaum: I hope you're satisfied--I now can't get that horrible Donna Summer song "On the Radio" out of my mind!!!

[walt]

Shanbaum: I hope you're satisfied--I now can't get that horrible Donna Summer song "On the Radio" out of my mind!!!

I have the same problem with Showdown's horrible "The Rodeo Song" when I get chided for some of my posts. Is it possibly a computer bug or virus, or some subliminal satanic thing? :p

[rep]

For those of us that were there, I kinda miss the good old days with 10 to one compression ratios, premium gas and extremely low ET. Nothing quite like the feeling of punching that 4 barrel, hearing the pipes roar and being slowly pushed further down into the back of the seat.

Liberals always say it is conservatives who want to direct everybody's lives.

In reality it is Liberals who want to tell us what to drive, how much gas we should use and so forth while the same rules don't apply to them. (Kerry and Babs for example SUV's and private Jets)

I am sickened at the continuing inference that this war is about oil. We were attacked remember. We have won the war liberals and critics said couldn't be won. How much land have we taken over and how much oil have we seized? The answer is none. Colin Powell's remarks regarding this are well said "All America has ever asked is for enough land to bury our dead where they fell on foreign soil"

Rep

[Texas Ranger]

The H2 is purely a status symbol, look y'all I can afford a $55K ugly car that gets 9 MPG, and I have so much $$$ that gas prices don't bother me! Their commercials show them out in the middle of nowhere, and I wonder how the heck they're going to get home...these same folks will run down to WVC to save money on cheap glasses....fortunately not all of them...the big fuel guzzlers are boaters, here the gas at the boat dock is $2.65 a gallon, and the big ski boats take on a couple hundred gallons, and run about 20 minutes a gallon, so it's using a lot of fuel out there water skiing, isn't it...love my Honda CRV...last time I was in europe, gas was about $5.00 a gallon, and when it hits $2.00 a gallon here, we're all in panic mode, why is that?

[chm2023]

The H2 is purely a status symbol, look y'all I can afford a $55K ugly car that gets 9 MPG, and I have so much $$$ that gas prices don't bother me! Their commercials show them out in the middle of nowhere, and I wonder how the heck they're going to get home...these same folks will run down to WVC to save money on cheap glasses....fortunately not all of them...the big fuel guzzlers are boaters, here the gas at the boat dock is $2.65 a gallon, and the big ski boats take on a couple hundred gallons, and run about 20 minutes a gallon, so it's using a lot of fuel out there water skiing, isn't it...love my Honda CRV...last time I was in europe, gas was about $5.00 a gallon, and when it hits $2.00 a gallon here, we're all in panic mode, why is that?

One reason: Europe has a great mass transit system. We don't, with some exceptions, so we are held hostage to the automobile. Europe is much more congested than the US, and the governments there make no bones about discouraging driving in and around major metropolitan areas. And I believe in London, there is a very stiff fee for driving into the city on weekdays, which helps cut down on traffic. It's a question of balancing individual liberties with the common good. On a more practical level, European countries are small compared to the US, less travel time to get various places you want to go.

[mrba]

One reason: Europe has a great mass transit system. We don't, with some exceptions, so we are held hostage to the automobile. Europe is much more congested than the US, and the governments there make no bones about discouraging driving in and around major metropolitan areas. And I believe in London, there is a very stiff fee for driving into the city on weekdays, which helps cut down on traffic. It's a question of balancing individual liberties with the common good. On a more practical level, European countries are small compared to the US, less travel time to get various places you want to go.

I don't think any of these are reasons for gas being 5 bucks in Europe.

[chm2023]

I don't think any of these are reasons for gas being 5 bucks in Europe.

The government taxes gasoline at a rate that is designed to discourage driving. This is the major reason for the $5/gallon, or more, price of gasoline.

[Spexvet]

One reason: Europe has a great mass transit system. We don't, with some exceptions, so we are held hostage to the automobile. Europe is much more congested than the US, and the governments there make no bones about discouraging driving in and around major metropolitan areas. And I believe in London, there is a very stiff fee for driving into the city on weekdays, which helps cut down on traffic. It's a question of balancing individual liberties with the common good. On a more practical level, European countries are small compared to the US, less travel time to get various places you want to go.

Also, Europeans do not have the same intolerance to B.O. that we Americans do. That means they can ride their bike to their job, work up a real good sweat, start stinking at about 10:30 am, and nobody cares!

[walt]

The government taxes gasoline at a rate that is designed to discourage driving. This is the major reason for the $5/gallon, or more, price of gasoline.

Or to pay for all their socialist welfare state programs and high rate of unemployment benefits?