Story Comments
Posted by: Grrr 1 year, 8 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
Grrr1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You are completely ignoring my earlier post. It doesn't matter how many reserves you talk about, until you get up to about 100 billion barrels harvestable for less than it costs to buy it outright. That might last us 10 years, IF we start reducing our need now, instead of continuing the increase. Plus it still has the worst aspect, in that it is very dirty fuel, both to develop and burn. It's a pointless waste of resources to develop another extension of the inevitable depletion. And yes, wilderness and wildlife are diverse resources of the likes that we cannot manufacture. If we we were to invest like levels of resources into pushing the commercialization of hydrogen cells, we fix the problem forever. Unlike strategic missile defense, it is feasible technology. And big oil should have been building those plants and refineries and the like during the last several years of record profits, instead of putting it off until crisis hoping we the taxpayer will foot the bill for them.
Reply-
Neutral
BB641 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're claiming I use old data, you're way behind in coal. Sure if you build the same plants the Germans did in the 1930's you're creating tons of waste, not today. Unlike then we have commercial uses for about 98% of coal based slurry. Everything from medical, power, plastics, and even road materials are now possible from this process. Plus you can control the carbon content of the gas and diesel in this process far easier than you can from crude oil.
As to the wilderness, do you really understand the vastness of the ares you're talking about. They cover millions of acres and we're talking about a tiny portion of that. Again, this isn't the 1930's. I work with energy and hydrogen cells are fun but we're really years out on that. At least on how to create it in a safe way. On hydrogen, I'm not sure which process you're talking about. My firm has been working on this for several years without coming up with a commercially solution.
Reply-
Neutral
Grrr1 year, 8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Again, what in my posts are you talking about? Where did I mention coal plants? Yes, we use commercially almost every bit of the result of refining, but that doesn't have anything to do with mitigating the effects of continuing to burn carbon based fuels as our predominant means of transportation around the globe, on land, sea and air.
And to get an idea of the supposed vastness of the wilderness areas we are talking about, perhaps we should compare them to the very real and true vastness of the wilderness that we have needlessly and senselessly destroyed already? What is left of the amazonian rain forest is truly vast, yet pales in comparison to what it once was, the rate of deforestation, and it's effects on our atmosphere, many of which are unknown. For all the studies on how much oil is in ANWAR, how many have truly studied the effects of disturbing such regions beyond it's effect on local wildlife? Ignorance on behalf of unbridled capitalism is still ignorance.
Reply-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
-
-
loading ...
getreal1
Gransater
loverman
Charlson
miklkit
Dionys
mesodude
lvrofwolves
GWHayduke
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.