Political Move Cave-In

[rolling7]

Better gas mileage = lower fuel prices
Less SUVs driven to soccer games = lower fuel prices
More mass transit use = lower fuel prices
Less fossil fuel comsumption = lower air pollution levels

And I agree with you but try making the people follow your plan.
You know how people are.

 

[Reba]

From accounts I have read, just smear feces on the walls to light up a room.

I imagine that would empty a room real quick, too.

 

[Banjo]

I don't think Japan has huge herds of livestock to sustain such a system. Besides, don't they already recycle the cow patties into fertilizer?

Do you really think using human feces (which requires other energy to process) would be enough to meet their needs?

There's a human population of 127 million in Japan. That's a lot of feces.

 

[rolling7]

Go back and read the article.

I read it but it is an opinion piece, as I said action talks louder than words.
Once the pipeline is allowed and real work begin, the article will be outdated.

 

[Reba]

There's a human population of 127 million in Japan. That's a lot of feces.

How much energy can you get from each BM? (Calculating in the energy required to collect, process, and deliver such a source.)

 

[naisho]

Soylent brown is not mainstream.. yet. I have my doubts that the nihonjin will make the shift towards it anytime soon, if even the next few years. People will still get to choose what kind of meats they buy.

I could see it used to serve for feeding livestock and animals, since those organisms are less fussy over what they want to eat...

 

[Banjo]

How much energy can you get from each BM? (Calculating in the energy required to collect, process, and deliver such a source.)

Nobody said that it has just to be one source, there are a number of sources to extract energy from. For instance, solar energy, hydroelectric power, wind power and more.

 

[Reba]

Soylent brown is not mainstream.. yet. I have my doubts that the nihonjin will make the shift towards it anytime soon, if even the next few years. People will still get to choose what kind of meats they buy.

I could see it used to serve for feeding livestock and animals, since those organisms are less fussy over what they want to eat...

Since the Mad Cow problem, I doubt that it would be a good idea.

 

[Reba]

Nobody said that it has just to be one source, there are a number of sources to extract energy from. For instance, solar energy, hydroelectric power, wind power and more.

Japan already has those resources (plus nuclear) but they're not enough.

 

[Banjo]

Japan already has those resources (plus nuclear) but they're not enough.

A small country like Japan should not sustain a population of that size to start with.

 

[DeafCaroline]

A small country like Japan should not sustain a population of that size to start with.

Not just Japan, it's China and India that's most worrisome. They are straining to feed their populations and already importing food from abroad which creates competition and will drive up (already has actually) prices of food.

 

[naisho]

Yeah, that's one of the major problems. Right now they're keeping it at bay by reducing the food size of (retail) major food franchises. Same stuff, smaller portions.
Have you guys seen the asian image of what mcdonalds is?

Mike Tyson could be eating their cheeseburgers as if they were like white castles.
Well, either that or we as the USA need to "size down".

 

[jillio]

Yeah, that's one of the major problems. Right now they're keeping it at bay by reducing the food size of (retail) major food franchises. Same stuff, smaller portions.
Have you guys seen the asian image of what mcdonalds is?

Mike Tyson could be eating their cheeseburgers as if they were like white castles.
Well, either that or we as the USA need to "size down".

Combination of the two, I would think.

 

[darkdog]

Sorry, almost forgot I had posted in this thread.

Good points, but increasing oil production in any way should not even be an option anymore. This country needs to start getting very serious about alternative, clean, renewable energy. So far, it's just been lip service and small pork barrel deals. We need a massive campaign to start weaning ourselves off oil within the next 10-20 years. Any increase in oil production is just a delay of the inevitable.

Finding a clean viable alternative to oil would be great and there's already plenty of effort to do that, but our problem isn't that we're not serious enough about it. Our problem is that we're constrained by physics, technology, and economics. Once something comes along that is at least as cheap and reliable as oil, it will naturally wean us off of oil, just as cars naturally weaned us off of horse and carriage. There will be no need for government to coerce us off of oil. If government tries to do that before there's a viable replacement, it'll only cause problems while solving nothing.

 

[TWA]

Sorry, almost forgot I had posted in this thread.

Finding a clean viable alternative to oil would be great and there's already plenty of effort to do that, but our problem isn't that we're not serious enough about it. Our problem is that we're constrained by physics, technology, and economics. Once something comes along that is at least as cheap and reliable as oil, it will naturally wean us off of oil, just as cars naturally weaned us off of horse and carriage. There will be no need for government to coerce us off of oil. If government tries to do that before there's a viable replacement, it'll only cause problems while solving nothing.

I disagree. Science has already found plenty of viable alternatives, or at least the pathways to those alternatives. More federal funding and less fraudulent government regulation will help speed that process up considerably.

It is large corporations that have a vested interest in keeping oil supreme that are the major barriers to clean, sustainable energy. Their major problem with clean, renewable energy is that the more widespread it becomes, the less profitable it becomes. Let's say solar panel technology finally reaches a point where it is capable of sustaining us (this is a looonnggg ways off, but let's just be hypothetical). There's plenty to be made short-term from the installation and conversion of new technology, but for the long term, there is nothing to be made. The minute the last solar panel is installed. . . poof goes the market. Poof goes one of the backbones of the world economy. That's great for the vast majority of the world's population, who struggle to secure energy, but it's bad for the people who control that market. Non-renewable = potential for infinite growth (at least until we run out of oil). Renewable = no long term growth.

 

[DeafCaroline]

Sorry, almost forgot I had posted in this thread.

Finding a clean viable alternative to oil would be great and there's already plenty of effort to do that, but our problem isn't that we're not serious enough about it. Our problem is that we're constrained by physics, technology, and economics. Once something comes along that is at least as cheap and reliable as oil, it will naturally wean us off of oil, just as cars naturally weaned us off of horse and carriage. There will be no need for government to coerce us off of oil. If government tries to do that before there's a viable replacement, it'll only cause problems while solving nothing.

What about government discouraging independent efforts to use green energy. Really wish I could remember this billionaire's name, he was originally from India and he wanted to set up an alternative to gas in America which was ethanol and even offered to use his own money to set up such gas stations and the government stepped in and refused to give him permission to do so because it would have threatened the imported oil trade.

 

[deafskeptic]

What about government discouraging independent efforts to use green energy. Really wish I could remember this billionaire's name, he was originally from India and he wanted to set up an alternative to gas in America which was ethanol and even offered to use his own money to set up such gas stations and the government stepped in and refused to give him permission to do so because it would have threatened the imported oil trade.

Is he the one who owns the world tallest building?

 

[Beowulf]

What about government discouraging independent efforts to use green energy. Really wish I could remember this billionaire's name, he was originally from India and he wanted to set up an alternative to gas in America which was ethanol and even offered to use his own money to set up such gas stations and the government stepped in and refused to give him permission to do so because it would have threatened the imported oil trade.

Is he the one who owns the world tallest building?

Burj Khalifa?

 

[kokonut]

I disagree. Science has already found plenty of viable alternatives, or at least the pathways to those alternatives. More federal funding and less fraudulent government regulation will help speed that process up considerably.

It is large corporations that have a vested interest in keeping oil supreme that are the major barriers to clean, sustainable energy. Their major problem with clean, renewable energy is that the more widespread it becomes, the less profitable it becomes. Let's say solar panel technology finally reaches a point where it is capable of sustaining us (this is a looonnggg ways off, but let's just be hypothetical). There's plenty to be made short-term from the installation and conversion of new technology, but for the long term, there is nothing to be made. The minute the last solar panel is installed. . . poof goes the market. Poof goes one of the backbones of the world economy. That's great for the vast majority of the world's population, who struggle to secure energy, but it's bad for the people who control that market. Non-renewable = potential for infinite growth (at least until we run out of oil). Renewable = no long term growth.

Good lord. More federal funding? Haven't we forgotten already?

Solyndra - $535 million- bankrupt.

Beacon Power - $43 Million - bankrupt.

Arizona-based Stirling Energy Systems filed for bankruptcy last month.

In August, two U.S. solar companies--Evergreen Solar Inc. and start-up Spectrawatt Inc.--filed for bankruptcy protection.

 

[TWA]

Good lord. More federal funding? Haven't we forgotten already?

Solyndra - $535 million- bankrupt.

Beacon Power - $43 Million - bankrupt.

Arizona-based Stirling Energy Systems filed for bankruptcy last month.

In August, two U.S. solar companies--Evergreen Solar Inc. and start-up Spectrawatt Inc.--filed for bankruptcy protection.

What do all these companies have in common? Well, they're companies. And they're trying to turn a profit, and I doubt they have the sort of research facilities necessary to do much. Also, this is what I mean when I say pork barrel lip service. These companies don't give a shit about real sustainable energy. They just want money, like all the rest.

To clarify, I mean more funding and research at our universities and national laboratories. Currently, our top talent and research money is being used for stupid shit like this: U.S. Army Tests Secret Hypersonic Weapon | Fox News

Maybe if we spent more time and effort on projects that would benefit mankind, as opposed to how to better kill ourselves, we wouldn't be having this discussion right now.