do we need oil? (Page 2) Tricky Ricky: Mankind has always had oil of some kind. The last century brought us crude oil and prosperity beyond imagination. Let's all do without crude oil for a month (say August in the south and January in the north), and see how many are left standing....it sure won't be the "tree huggers".  $$SALINA$$: oil is certainly necessary for many things , whichever type , i cant imagine my massage without it  Excellency: Your massage is probably a natural oil, be it cocoanut, palm, or vegetable... petrolium and mineral oil may be hard on your skin  MattyD89: no one NEEDS oil. but in this world today, it couldnt run without it. the world goes through 80 billion barrels a day, stoping that would stop productionof everything. of course with the nultiple types of turbines we know how to make now we could drasicallt reduce this number but with lobbists and large corporations now a days there is no way its ever going to decrease until we run out  everythingistaken: This is a topic I've been interested in for ages. Sad reality is, we're hopelessly addicted to the stuff. We'll end up using it until its gone... at least the cheap, easily accessible stuff. It's going to be truly interesting when it starts to dry up & prices go through the roof. That's the only scenario that will realistically force change. Might be a little late by then though. It's pretty scary given that much of the world is now accustomed to a lifestyle that revolves around cheap oil. MattyD89: we have alternatives... solar power, wind power, hydro power, nuclear power, bio diesel, ect. just a renewabl energy source makes a lot less money then the power of supply and demand for a non renable resource.  LiptonCambell: Its not that simple- like how Solar Power is expensive, or Nuclear power is frowned at. Personally, I say its time to embrace nuclear power. MattyD89: nuclear power is frowned at because people are retarted. did you know the united states armed forces uses ships (subs and aircraft carriers)with nuclear reactors on them so they dont need to sotp and re fuel for 27 years if they dont want to. nuclear power is so great we only need such small amounts to harness such gigantic power. and maybe with the LHC well soon learn more about anti matter which is about 10 000 times stronger then any nuclear source we have. but theres no doubt that with some solar, some wind, lots of hydro, and lots of nuclear power we could easily get by without oil. the only problem is switching from burning fossil fuels to not. and this is hard because we ahve been burning fossil fuels for a very long time now, its been very effective, its relativly easy, and it makes TONES of money for a lot of people and creates a lot of jobs. so of course large corporations who hold the most power in regards to our energy consumptions dont want to use another source of energy when they are already doing so well and are so successful. they know in thier lfie time they wont see the end of oil... they know ni thier life time they wont see the destruction of our planet due to fossil fuel consumptions... they are making billions... why would they give a f*$#$@z shit to change? has no one seen the death of the electric car? cause that shits real. Excellency: Electricity is 100 percent efficient as a heat source, and very efficient as a prime mover, but our battery technology is lacking. long trips would have to be by bus, or plane, or ship..not electric.. commuting could and will be electric. the problem is when we are all dependent upon electricity it becomes a monopoly..the rates will skyrocket! Excellency: i recently heard from a treehugger our canadian candu reactors recycle their waste... having worked in the nukes, i have had training on nuclear waste and radiation..and can tell you for sure....there is NO such THING as clean energy..the tritium that experts thought would break down in 2-300 years is stored in thick safe containers near the nuclear plants, and will be dangerous for thousands of years.....or till we can find something to make it inert... how does one make sunlight inert??? its the same sort of deal.. MattyD89: yes nuclear power has a hrmful waste product. but the biproducts is very small in comparasin to any type of fossil fuel. like half a gram of nuclear power can generate enough energy for a house for yeeeeeeeeaaaarrrrrrrrrsssssssssssssssssssssssssss LiptonCambell: Yucca Mountain was the proposed plan, at least for Americans, although its been riddled with delays. It was intended to hold nuclear waste completely safely, hundreds of miles from anyone, anything, any fault lines, and any water. It seems, because of politics mostly, that this much needed waster repository is being abandoned, though... Excellency: lol matty would you rather dring a gram of oil or a gram of tritiated waste? think carefully... MattyD89: i wouldnt be stupid enough to drink a gram of either. with nuclear waste you store it properly, not drink it. LiptonCambell: Clint, if nothing else, you must agree that a place such as Yucca mountain is essential. Nuclear waste must be properly and carefully disposed of- and currently, our countries do not have a proper place to store it. Excellency: i think we jumped into producing electricity with nuclear before we understood nuclear well enough. if i could.. we would continue making steam with nuke only until the current cycle of radiated waste was complete, the amount of damage it does to man.. in just operations, and maintenance is unacceptable in my books..we are trading life for power... LiptonCambell: Ummm that seems like an unfair statement Clint- after all, does the "we jumped in before we fully understood the consequences" apply also to coal.....and oil....and hydroelectric....and numerous of other technologies..... People chose Nuclear because efficient, cheap alternatives were not available to them. And nuclear remains to be far more efficient. Outbackjack: I see McLipton is back with his advocation of Nuclear power. Hows the paid mouthpiece of the corporations going these days. In the past you have vehemently represented the rights of corporations at the expense of the environment,the free trade fallacy,how the market should be left alone whilst conveniently ignoring the GFC of 2008 and repeatedly ignore the evidence on global warming. What next? Maybe you could start advocating strip mining? Outbackjack: What planet are you on Matty? Heres some previous discussions where I have detailed the fallacy of Nuclear Power: http://www.wireclub.com/Forums/ViewTopic.aspx?ForumId=772987&ParentId=750478&Replied=10& http://www.wireclub.com/Forums/ViewTopic.aspx?ForumId=772987&ParentId=493342&Replied=5 I suggest everyone reads these threads before parroting the rubbish spewed by the discredited Nuclear Power Industry. |
