The Real End To Terrorism

[fimbulwinter]

I will side with the liberals on this one:

The real way to end terrorism and remove power from those who hate us is to develop tangible alternative energy sources now. The US should use monies that would go to keeping "world war" style arms (battleships, fighter jets etc.) and build nuclear plants in the near future and massive offshore vestas-style windfarms like denmark etc. long term.

Remember the only reason the middle east holds any sway in the world is their control over energy. They contribute nothing to the world scientific or economic communities and would be unable to fund terrorist operations and the supporting infrastructure if it were not for them being awash in oil money.

fim

[bobman0330]

This plan makes little sense:
-Since when is "build nuclear power plants" a part of the liberal agenda?
-Most or all of the US Navy's battleships have long since been decommissioned
-What with the economic growth of China and the looming prospect of the de-democritization of Russia, might it not be prudent to maintain the capability to defend ourselves against future conventional threats?
-I had always understood liberal opinion to be that poverty and oppression were partially to blame for terrorism. Now you're saying that the middle east isn't poor enough?
-Developing alternative sources of electrical power is insufficient, as most demand for oil is for gasoline, jet fuel, etc. We would also need to develop PRACTICAL electrical or hydrogen cars (maybe we could dissolve a few infantry divisions to pay for that one).
-Is there any reason to believe that crushing the economy of these nations will prevent them from supporting terror? Afghanistan was very very poor, yet still managed to sponsor a great deal of terrorism. Likewise Syria. And the British suicide bombers were domestically supported.

[ACPlayer]

Your concept of finding solutions that we can implement is sound. Alternate energy policies is a good start.

[ QUOTE ]
They contribute nothing to the world scientific or economic communities

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think this is so? I am sure that Pepsi would love to sell in Tehran and McDonalds could have a branch there.

[BZ_Zorro]

Nuclear power is spot on. It's clean, cheap and infinitely sustainable. It solves the greenhouse problem. IMO it is the only viable solution to the world's energy crisis in the next 50 years, baring some major breakthrough. Wind, solar, tidal power are not really viable options for mainstream energy production for the needs of the U.S.. They're good as an extra.

And yeah, oil is part of the reason this region has corrupt governments and sick societies. Money without work has always done that. So I agree 100%.

[HtotheNootch]

[ QUOTE ]
This plan makes little sense:
-Since when is "build nuclear power plants" a part of the liberal agenda?

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually according to an article in Wired, the author of "The Gaia Hypothesis" is now pro-nuclear. I think the winds are shifting on this one.

[ QUOTE ]
-Most or all of the US Navy's battleships have long since been decommissioned

[/ QUOTE ]

True, although strangely enough, some WWII style weapons including battleships are just what's needed in the current conflict.

[slickpoppa]

Ending reliance on fossil fuels is certainly a good long term goal, but barring a miracle, it will do nothing to proetct us from terrorism in the next 20 years. The fact is that the US economy is so dependent on fossil fuels that even if we reduced our demand drastically, we would still be dependent on foreign oil.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
Ending reliance on fossil fuels is certainly a good long term goal, but barring a miracle, it will do nothing to proetct us from terrorism in the next 20 years. The fact is that the US economy is so dependent on fossil fuels that even if we reduced our demand drastically, we would still be dependent on foreign oil.

[/ QUOTE ]

All true. And exactly why we need to decrease our dependence on oil as much as possible, as soon as possible. To decrease our dependence, we need to decrease our demand. To decrease our demand we need to increase the cost.

The current rise in gas prices is a pain in the arse, but in the long run, it is a GOOD thing. I even think we should put a massive tax (flame away) on oil in order to force us to other sources of energy faster. Otherwise, we will be riding the oil train as long as we can, and we will continue to bear the brunt of the negative consequences.

-ptmusic

[andyfox]

I'm not sure if all your sentiments are liberal ones, but the main point is a good one: our energy "policy" is a disgrace. We should have been rid of our dependency on foreign oil by now, and have plans to reduce massively the use of oil of any kind. The political, economic, and environmental implications of continuing as we are have already been disastrous and will undoubtedly get worse.

[slickpoppa]

[ QUOTE ]
We should have been rid of our dependency on foreign oil by now

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree that energy independence is an important goal, but there is absolutely no energy policy that could have posibly ended our dependence on foreign oil by now.

[tylerdurden]

[ QUOTE ]
True, although strangely enough, some WWII style weapons including battleships are just what's needed in the current conflict.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? A battleship must be the absolute least effective weapon against a distributed enemy. A Yugo full of guys with AK-47s would be about 100x more effective.

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
Wind, solar, tidal power are not really viable options for mainstream energy production for the needs of the U.S.. They're good as an extra.

[/ QUOTE ]

nope. TWO FUTHER MUCKING MW (http://www.vestas.com/uk/Home/index.asp)

tell me that site doesn't give you a raging hardon.

fim

EDIT: in ten years, there are projections of a 5MW offshore turbine. in 30 years, 10MW. the most powerful human being on earth will be the one who owns robber-baron style installations of 10's of thousands of these turbines in the gulfstream...

[Felix_Nietsche]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wind, solar, tidal power are not really viable options for mainstream energy production for the needs of the U.S.. They're good as an extra.

[/ QUOTE ]

nope. TWO FUTHER MUCKING MW (http://www.vestas.com/uk/Home/index.asp)
.

[/ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ****
You have swallowed the hype hook, line, and sinker.
The energy wind/solar farms are just PR ploys to get votes for the environmentalists. Cost studies have shown these methods of gathering energy are rather pathetic. I suspect the same is true with tidal energy gathering.

I think nuclear energy is a great alternative. The lack of greenhouse gases from nuclear SHOULD please the global warming cult but instead the green crowd hates nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is a political tar baby every since the 3-Mile Island Overhype. Another concern is if the muslim crazies try to crash a plane into a nuclear plant. BUT....you can't power automobiles on nuclear power. Oil is still king...

PS
The wind farms has a secondary benefit. The revolving blades are good for killing lots of flying birds. So if you like to eat fowl, just take a walk to wind farm and help yourself to as much free meat as you want. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wind, solar, tidal power are not really viable options for mainstream energy production for the needs of the U.S.. They're good as an extra.

[/ QUOTE ]

nope. TWO FUTHER MUCKING MW (http://www.vestas.com/uk/Home/index.asp)
.

[/ QUOTE ]
************************************************** ****
You have swallowed the hype hook, line, and sinker.
The energy wind/solar farms are just PR ploys to get votes for the environmentalists. Cost studies have shown these methods of gathering energy are rather pathetic. I suspect the same is true with tidal energy gathering.

I think nuclear energy is a great alternative. The lack of greenhouse gases from nuclear SHOULD please the global warming cult but instead the green crowd hates nuclear energy. Nuclear energy is a political tar baby every since the 3-Mile Island Overhype. Another concern is if the muslim crazies try to crash a plane into a nuclear plant. BUT....you can't power automobiles on nuclear power. Oil is still king...

PS
The wind farms has a secondary benefit. The revolving blades are good for killing lots of flying birds. So if you like to eat fowl, just take a walk to wind farm and help yourself to as much free meat as you want. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

you obviously have no real idea what you're talking about. this is why i hate libertarian republicans just as much as i hate liberals. look at the damn math. the V120 5MW turbine is $4.6M. now work out ROI. realize why the danes are buying these things faster than vestas can make them.

what you said is true of first and second generation hippie-esque single home turbines. these are red-blooded hardcore capitalist behemouths. i won't even address your other points as you obviously took no time to think when making them.

fim

[Felix_Nietsche]

"look at the damn math. the V120 5MW turbine is $4.6M. now work out ROI. realize why the danes are buying these things faster than vestas can make them.
what you said is true of first and second generation hippie-esque single home turbines. these are red-blooded hardcore capitalist behemouths. i won't even address your other points as you obviously took no time to think when making them."
************************************************** ******
The laws of economics are like the laws of gravity. If there is an economic viable solution to a problem companies will FLOCK to purchase that solution. If the new generation of alternative energy equipment is so wonderful then you should agree with the following:

COMPANIES ALL OVER THE WORLD WILL SOON RUN TO PURCHASE THIS EQUIPMENT.

RIGHT? So why isn't the USA and other countries buying this equipment? Either the USA has not yet heard of this wonderful equipment ....OR.... maybe it is not that great. Maybe Danish lawmakers have passed laws that subsidizes this equipment which ARTIFICIALLY makes it economically viable. Remove the subsidy and this company goes bankrupt the next day.

This story reminds of cancer cure stories in the news. It seems at least once a year the news publishes a story of a new wonder drug that will cure cancer. And within a year everyone forgets the hype of the new wonder-drug and forgets about it. It is just hype.

***IF*** what you claim is true then everybody will want to buy this equipment. If we hear nothing more about this in the next 3 months, then we will know this was hype. Surely you can agree with this statement. Right? Lets start the 90 day clock today. I guess the rest of the world hasn't heard how great this equipment is.... So after 90 days are you going to concede you got fooled. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[fimbulwinter]

[ QUOTE ]
"look at the damn math. the V120 5MW turbine is $4.6M. now work out ROI. realize why the danes are buying these things faster than vestas can make them.
what you said is true of first and second generation hippie-esque single home turbines. these are red-blooded hardcore capitalist behemouths. i won't even address your other points as you obviously took no time to think when making them."
************************************************** ******
The laws of economics are like the laws of gravity. If there is an economic viable solution to a problem companies will FLOCK to purchase that solution. If the new generation of alternative energy equipment is so wonderful then you should agree with the following:

COMPANIES ALL OVER THE WORLD WILL SOON RUN TO PURCHASE THIS EQUIPMENT.

RIGHT? So why isn't the USA and other countries buying this equipment? Either the USA has not yet heard of this wonderful equipment ....OR.... maybe it is not that great. Maybe Danish lawmakers have passed laws that subsidizes this equipment which ARTIFICIALLY makes it economically viable. Remove the subsidy and this company goes bankrupt the next day.

This story reminds of cancer cure stories in the news. It seems at least once a year the news publishes a story of a new wonder drug that will cure cancer. And within a year everyone forgets the hype of the new wonder-drug and forgets about it. It is just hype.

***IF*** what you claim is true then everybody will want to buy this equipment. If we hear nothing more about this in the next 3 months, then we will know this was hype. Surely you can agree with this statement. Right? Lets start the 90 day clock today. I guess the rest of the world hasn't heard how great this equipment is.... So after 90 days are you going to concede you got fooled. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

did you even read what i wrote?

there are currently 5 vestas installations in the us. the US can't get their hands on these turbines as the danes are willing to pay more than asking price. the problem here is manufacturing, not lack of demand.

again, use your brain. try the numbers, look at the history of the product and then tell me it's not economically viable. IKEA and WALMART both started out slow due to publicly precieved poor quality and lack of ability to expand quickly enough. when people can pay $5M for 5MW of generation, the problem is surely not lack of economic want.

fim

[Felix_Nietsche]

We shall see won't we. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Felix_Nietsche]

How about we make a friendly wager?
If one year from now, if the USA is not buying this equipment by the boatload you will write a one-page essay on the topic:

"Why Felix_Nietsche is the smartest most intelligent poster in the political forum (and probably the smartest in the world) and why I wish could be more like him."

If in one year this equipment is flooding into the USA replacing traditional power sources, I will write a one page essay on a topic of your choice. And by flooding in the USA, I do not mean a few prototypes bought by the govt to conduct experiments on. I mean widescale acceptance by private industry/public utilities. A congressional law which subsidizes the purchase of this equipment will void the bet.

So you want to bet?

[etgryphon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ending reliance on fossil fuels is certainly a good long term goal, but barring a miracle, it will do nothing to proetct us from terrorism in the next 20 years. The fact is that the US economy is so dependent on fossil fuels that even if we reduced our demand drastically, we would still be dependent on foreign oil.

[/ QUOTE ]

All true. And exactly why we need to decrease our dependence on oil as much as possible, as soon as possible. To decrease our dependence, we need to decrease our demand. To decrease our demand we need to increase the cost.

The current rise in gas prices is a pain in the arse, but in the long run, it is a GOOD thing. I even think we should put a massive tax (flame away) on oil in order to force us to other sources of energy faster. Otherwise, we will be riding the oil train as long as we can, and we will continue to bear the brunt of the negative consequences.

-ptmusic

[/ QUOTE ]

Or at least stop the subsidizing of the oil industry. I can't understand why the US continues to susidize an industry that is making record profits every year.

If we leveled the playing field with no subsidies, Wind Power would be slightly better than Oil. Solar Power need to come a long way before it becomes economically competative.

-Gryph