Posted on 03/25/2005 7:40:52 PM PST by neverdem
Two NYTIMES articles claiming the sky is falling and the oil's running out..
Whoda thunk it?
The article is a load of bull manure.
So let's get started then. No time to waste.
So we come up with one standardized plan, we tell the greenies to kiss off and we start building.
What is the problem?
Oil sands / tar sands are economically viable at $30/bbl. That is why a number of petroleum companies have commercial production facilities already producing oil from these fields in Canada and Venezuela.
Au contraire...normally I'd agree with you on ANYTHING spewed out by the Slimes, but the author is spot-on here. Believe me, the near term future of electric power is as he described.
I work for AEP...trust me, these combined cycle units ARE the future.
And, the guy has some very rare candor ( for the Slimes, that is). He's nailed the current situation in the energy biz.
I remember back when I was in the 4th grade a teacher telling my class that when we grew up and could drive the world would be out of fossil fuel, which meant no more gasoline for our cars. Well, guess what..I've been grown up for several years now and we haven't run out yet. I say drill away in ANWAR- the bison or whatever those animals are up there can just get out of the way of the oil pumps!
Oops, I almost wasted my time reading this article before I saw that it was form the NYT. Whew!
read #8
Those states deserve it.
That's what I heard too. In addition, they said Canada was producing light sweet crude from tar sands which means low sulfer. Not sure this article is entirely accurate.
But our flying cars would use something else.
A simple fix even back:
High Pressure Fuel injection
We could have saved 33% of the fuel burned in the last 50 years & had only half the pollution.
Only production high pressure engines being made today are for boats(E-tech by Evenrude).
Nope. The Author is wrong about nuclear power. We have a lot more reactors than he states, they just happen to be on Navy ships. I once figured out that pound for pound the energy value of Uranium is worth many times more than it's weight in gold, and that's only going to improve as oil runs out. The only real problem with nuclear power is the fools who have churned out so much red tape it's not worth pursuing. Case in point: we have treaties keeping us from putting nuclear waste in the deep oceans or Antarctica. I suspect said treaties were engineered by the Soviet Union to help cripple nuclear power production by the west..
We had standardized plans in the 70's.
The NYT, bunch eagerly waiting, hoping for that dreaded day, (which they will be totaly exempt exempt from doncha know?),,, what a--holes.
Integrated gasification combined-cycle seems like a good technology, although it is obscure and I haven't read much about it. Don't worry, though. Now that the NYT has made the enviroweenies aware of it, it is bound to come under protest before too long. The only way for a new technology to be environmentally ok is to keep the enviros in the dark about it, because for the most part, they're too stupid to understand it in the first place.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.