Something wrong with Nuclear Plants?

This one is better than the last one. The last one was painful. This one was only Not Good. There's some dry comedic value to watching them inanely accusing each other of being the first to start accusing the other of inane things.

So I woke up after a two day holiday and discovered that there is a guy named Joe, who is a plumber, but really he isn't a licensed plumber and he owes the government taxes.... Why is this guy Joe worthy of three "breaking news" rss feeds?

fyi: "clean coal" is most definitly not an oxymoron. And offshore drilling, will infact affect the price of oil/gasoline the very day that they announce they will drill. not just 10 or 15 years after they pump it out, and it won't be necessary to maintain or even procede with the drilling if within those 10 - 15 years oil is no longer the number 1 energy source. As some people might have figured out by now (and some have known for the past 10 years) the modern economic world is based on the projected price of things in the future, not the current price of the thing now. Otherwise known as speculation. i.e. Stocks go down today, because of fears that there will be a recession next month and for 1 year or more. Stocks do not go down because of a recessions that happened in the past. or are currently happening. (atleast thats what Alan Greenspan says in his book)

Are you kidding me? CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY DOES NOT EXIST. THAT IS A FACT. COAL INDUSTRY REPS HAVE STATED ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS THAT "CARBON CAPTURE" TECHNOLOGY (THE THEORHETICAL TECHNOLOGY THAT WOULD KEEP COAL PLANTS FROM POLUTING) IS 10-15 YEARS AWAY. IT DOES NOT EXIST. WHILE COAL IS NEEDED IN OUR CURRENT ENERGY SITUATION DUMPING MORE MONEY INTO COAL IS JUST ASININE. THATS WHAT "CLEAN COAL" MEANS.

As for offshore drilling, any person in the industry (ala ME) will tell you its a crapshoot, and will only work 75% of the time (each drilling operation costing millions upon millions) So not only do you have to drill multiple times driving up the costs offshore drilling into the extreme, the end result is SO MINIMAL AND NEGLIGIBLE it only ends up benefitting the mining and oil companies, not the American people. Seriously do some research before you start quoting bubblehead talking points.

What is your point?

You havn't rebuted a single thing I said.

"clean coal" is not an oxy moron. Its a technology worth researching. FYI, there isn't a single technology that would replace oil before 10- 15 years from now. I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make.


Offshore drilling, regardless of its real productive results, WILL result in lower gas prices and oil prices the day its announced. (meaning, the day a company says, we are going to be drilling for more oil at spot x ,becasue we know y amount of oil exists there) You don't even have to pump anything out of the ground for it to lower the price of gasoline. (Similarly, the accouncement that oil production will stop in some location will raise the price of gasoline) Some 10 = 15% of the world oil market is currently held by non fuel companies. (i.e. speculators)

Are mining and oil company workers not American people? Are they somehow non-citizens?

Coal will never be clean. Oxymoron.

Anyway yeah I kinda forgot you were Daganev, and had the whole no-basic-reasoning-skills thing going on, so yeah, I'll just leave it at that.

theoretically you could change byproducts of byproducts of byproducts of coal and end up with a series of harmless compounds i would imagine. why you wouldn't want to overly invest in solar power is beyond me though.

It's sad when people are willing to let the price of energy escalate beyond affordability in the sake of environmentalism. I'm all for being clean, so long as we don't destroy our economy further by doing it. Hydrogen cars and hybrids sound nice and fluffy until you look at the economics of it. This technology is expensive, not everybody will be able to afford to run out and buy a new hybrid or hydrogen car to save the world. I'm not opposed to these vehicles being developed, so long as they continue to provide evidence that they are reaching the goal and not just wasting research $$$. I'm just saying that we also need to drill oil as long as possible, for those who don't have the luxury of buying new cars, or purchasing expensive retrofitting for their current cars.

We need nuclear plants as well as coal and oil. Did you know that it will take a 300 square mile windmill farm to make the energy that a 3 square mile coal plant can produce?
And anybody that wants to attack Palin for foreign experience, she has a higher security clearance than anybody in congress.

My father actually does a lot of work regarding emissions. The problem, actually, isn't the technology itself- it is infastructure, in large part. No matter what of the viable alternative vehicle fuels you run with, you're going to need fueling stations of some sort. In order to be viable, these would have to come into existence on a grand scale, almost immediately.

The only industry that has the resources to do this? Gas companies. The same monsters who restrict the supply of oil to drive prices to create truly record breaking profits. We could implement alternative fuels, in theory, but we'd more than likely just be throwing the ball to the gas companies, who could either run it into the ground, or simply shift to a new oligopoly. We would need to put the teeth back into the Sherman and Clayton Anti trust acts and try and undo the twenty-plus years of ineptitude of the FTC.

The other problem is raw ignorance. You have California law makers and politicians who use the environment the way South American dictators use hate speech. Regulations coming from that state aren't even sensical. They push the emissions envelope by standards dictated by politics, not environmental impact, not marginal benefit to the environment, not taking into account industry. They do it to sustain a bureaucracy, or to get re-elected.

Keep in mind that some of these these high-minded environmentalist politicians also want to pump water clear across the country from the Great Lakes Basin. I suppose stomping the crap out of an environment is OK, so long as it isn't your own, eh?

And that, peoples, is why California sucks and should be thrown into the sea like an unwilling lemming.


...wait what were we talking about?

I almost giggled reading this.

A security clearance means you pay your bills, don't speed, don't have friends from foreign countries, and someone was willing to dump a few thousand bucks on you. A security clearance does not imply intelligence or experience with people outside your neighborhood. There are plenty of Boeing employees with secret security clearances, and not one of them have it because they can put Kazakhstan on a map.

That example doesn't give me much reason to think that her security level is similar to that enjoyed by random Boeing employees.

I think we'd be pretty willing to go. Frankly, as The End Of The World predicts, I'd be happy if we broke off to hang out with Hawaii.

After all the recent Palinism, though, I think Alaska can no longer come.

The SNL skit was better than the actual debate.

I'd be glad to let California go too, if even just to get rid of Hollywood. You guys could leave us alone and vise versa. Everybody could choose where to go. Environmentalists could go there, and non enviros could stay here.

Are you for real?

It is. That's really all there is to getting a security clearance of any level. You have to understand that random military people pick up security clearances simply by dealing with vaguely sensitive stuff. When you're developing secret military weapons, then yeah, you also end up with a security clearance. It doesn't matter why you have it. The criteria is always the same: you have no debt that would lead you to corruption, you have no criminal record, you have no foreign contacts that can be compromised, and someone was willing to dump a few thousand bucks into your background check.

The debates are pretty boring to me. The most interesting of all was the Vice-presidential debate, which is saying somehting.

This thread is ethnocentric. Where's the Canadian Debate thread? We had elections too (Course the whole thing took one month rather then this one year farce in the states >>)

One year? Pff. This has been going on for more than a year.

It's the US. Everything is bigger, louder, and more expensive.

And remember, Texas is to the rest of the US what the US is to Canada.