How can the US be labeled a polluter if we don't make anything anymore?

[Defiant]

Spiffor,
I was talking about England itself, the USA is about 300 million. Have you ever been to the USA? My 4x4 is a pickup, which is larger than most truly defined SUV like, Dakotas, Expeditions and the such. Do you even drive much in Europe? The reason I am asking is to qualify you as legimate for reasoning our uses for larger vehicles. I use mine for a couple of reasons, I have a wood burning fireplace and I have some land where I cut wood to burn for the winter(or am I not supposed to burn wood ), also we get alot of snow here in Wisconsin and a 4x4 is perfect for that kind of driving, and I carry alot of equipment in the back of my 4x4, it is tough to get to hunting spots without a 4x4, so how exactly does driving a little car help me with these things?

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Defiant
Cruddy,
I think you use less power because there are less of you.

I was referring to average energy use per person.

Originally posted by Defiant
I don't know about better insulation and heating, we are pretty advanced here too, we don't want to p!ss away money if we don't have to.

Up to a point, yes... although the US being bigger, you are going to lose more power for each connection (because it's a much bigger area).

Maybe superconductor mains cables would sort out these losses... but the problem's even bigger with Russia, cause they have the furthest distance on average to transmit power over.

Originally posted by Defiant
What is your average climate, here where I live, in the last 45 days we have not been above 32, we might have to use a little bit more energy to heat the house.
Smaller homes, I don't know the average sq. ft. or sq. mt between our two nations.

Not sure how to compare here... I mean, the US includes places like Hawaii and California, as well as Alaska...

Maybe comparing each state to the Euro average might be more meaningful?

Originally posted by Defiant
I know we have some enormous house(not mine), but some people also live in really small 1 beadroom houses.

Yeah, like me in a 1 br flat... or Dissident in his trailer...

How many wind farms have you got planned then?

[Defiant]

Cruddy,
Funny you ask about the wind farms. Look on a USA map, I live in central Wisconsin and had to travel to Mid Iowa and I took a route through southern Minnesota and in the northern part of Iowa I saw a hundreds of massive windmills, it must have lasted for 50 miles, but I had never seen that before. Looked like super huge plane propellars on a stick, all twirling producing electricity. I asked at the place I had to go, but no one knew the power out put of one of those, I was curious.
I believe Englands climate is alot like San Francisco. My climate is like flippin russia's climate.

[Cruddy]

Originally posted by Defiant
Cruddy,
Funny you ask about the wind farms. Look on a USA map, I live in central Wisconsin and had to travel to Mid Iowa and I took a route through southern Minnesota and in the northern part of Iowa I saw a hundreds of massive windmills, it must have lasted for 50 miles, but I had never seen that before. Looked like super huge plane propellars on a stick, all twirling producing electricity. I asked at the place I had to go, but no one knew the power out put of one of those, I was curious.

Good, because wind, wave solar and hydro are almost totally pollution free... that's the way to go.

Originally posted by Defiant
I believe Englands climate is alot like San Francisco. My climate is like flippin russia's climate.

Mmm... I'm no expert on geography OR the USA... but maybe more like southern Washington state? Lots of westerly winds, mild (doesn't freeze for long) but lots of rain and fog.

[alva]

I believe Englands climate is alot like San Francisco.

They wish!!

I don't want people hurt either, however, where does it stop, McDonalds kills people, cars kill people, drinking kills people, NASCAR kills people, guns kill people, heating homes with oil kills people, basic industry kills people........................ so tell me where does it stop.

It stops where someone can't be hurt by actions performed by others.
I will give you the mcdonalds one though.
Drinking is fine, even great, just don't drive a car while drunk .

Just have some basic respect for one another (even when it relates to pollution)

I will tell you where, guys like Sava and Spiffor want us riding our bicycles, wearing black pajamas with funny little hats singing kum by ya my love, with our freedom being dictated to by MR. Hillary Clinton. That may be the Euro/communist way

Where did this come suddenly come from.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by alva

Quote:

I believe Englands climate is alot like San Francisco.

They wish!!

Quote:

I don't want people hurt either, however, where does it stop, McDonalds kills people, cars kill people, drinking kills people, NASCAR kills people, guns kill people, heating homes with oil kills people, basic industry kills people........................ so tell me where does it stop.

It stops where someone can't be hurt by actions performed by others.
I will give you the mcdonalds one though.
Drinking is fine, even great, just don't drive a car while drunk .

Just have some basic respect for one another (even when it relates to pollution)

Quote:

I will tell you where, guys like Sava and Spiffor want us riding our bicycles, wearing black pajamas with funny little hats singing kum by ya my love, with our freedom being dictated to by MR. Hillary Clinton. That may be the Euro/communist way

Where did this come suddenly come from.

Alva,
Do you hear what you are saying, when the actions of one doesn't hurt the other, everything I listed is that.
Would be beautiful if people didn't drive when they drank, never happen, but nice idea so lets outlaw booze. Stupid driving by a rookie in NASCAR can really affect the lives of other drivers(did you see Daytona 500 last weekend? so lets outlaw fast car races besides the pollution they put in the air with 600 horse power engines., guns(are you kidding me) almost everybody on this site wants to outlaw guns, how much pollutants does industry produce, must outlaw them, nevermind the computers we are working on right now.
In time, things will get better through technology but I am not about to change my way of living for what I believe the few tree huggers want.

[alva]

Stupid driving by a rookie in NASCAR can really affect the lives of other drivers(did you see Daytona 500 last weekend? so lets outlaw fast car races

They know the risks, and are (usually) well rewarded if they are succesfull. I'm not saying I like these guys to get killed, but don't really have a problem with it. Doesn't mean that thay can't do things to make it more secure though.
( and no, I didn't see it )

almost everybody on this site wants to outlaw guns

I wonder why....,hmm, maybe because it's primary function is to kill...???

how much pollutants does industry produce, must outlaw them, nevermind the computers we are working on right now.

So we must invest in research to make them cleaner, nobody said anything about outlawing them (unless they, yes again, become too dangerous ( nuclear power could be an example )

In time, things will get better through technology

The thing is, that we need to make sure there is enough to develope and implement new technology before everything is screwed up beyond repair.
( ohh, and I like breathing too)

btw, it's not only waiting for the technology, we already can do quite alot, but we do need to want too (or should I say big business has to want too)

BTW, Am I right in thinking you don't live in or near a big -smog filled- city, but rather roam free in the great -clear sky- outdoors??

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Maybe because very few people live there? If so few people are really affected, how can your whole economy suffer so much?

because that's where all our grain is raised? I have no clue how many people live in those states (meaning Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Iowa, Dakotas etc) but I know its at least 15 million. If you jacked up the price of gas these folks would either be essentially stranded on their farms and small cities or move to the urban areas leaving the farms to corporations (increasingly these days anyway) or the [gulp] government.

Originally posted by Spiffor
It is very rarely useful to drive an SUV instead of a car, and I fail to see why people would need an SUV in their daily commute.

SUVs are great for hauling kids around to school and back, carrying groceries, buying larger items like a lawnmower or something from the store, moving smaller pieces of furniture etc. I my cherokee. It has made my life so much easier than when I had a small car. And the 4x4 handles inclement weather much better.

[chequita guevara]

SUVs suck! Sure, they're convenient to own, but for those of us not in SUVs, you're inconsiderate, polluting *******s!

[Defiant]

Alva,
I view(biased) the United States as the freeist(sp) nation on Earth. Yes, there are drawbacks, no sane person would argue otherwise. That said, the benefits greatly outweigh the costs and one of those cost of coarse are deaths, cause by a variety of reasons, that could be outlawed and probably reduce the over all deaths. But am I willing to give up those freedoms that I enjoy to achieve that point, absolutely not.

NASCAR, is dangerous, you put 43 drivers out at 200 mph hour, you are just waiting for a tragedy, but they know the risks. So do the fans, in the event a tire gets loose and winds up hitting a fan, they are still there. Nobody in their right mind will outlaw NASCAR.

The same is true with alcohol, wish more people would not abuse it, I included at times, but to abolish it, is a greater evil.

Guns, some view them as sport or defense not just to kill, and some can agrue they are used to create freedom from oppression, still, they are a greater good.

Outlaw nuclear power, with that command you just put most of our East and West coasts out of power, for heating and electricity, futile and moot point.

And way down the food chain, my damn 4x4 Dodge Pickup which I want.

All of them relate to freedom and how much personal problems we are will to accept or not accept for that freedom.

[alva]

I never said I would (want to) outlaw any of things you say (except guns that is)

-
Ohh and eugh

The same is true with alcohol, wish more people would not abuse it, I included at times, but to abolish it, is a greater evil.

They tried this somewhere, can't remember where though.

And could you explain why, say, cannabis is illegal in the US?
Isn't this a restriction on ones freedom?

Or just not your freedom?

I view(biased) the United States as the freeist(sp) nation on Earth.

Me thinks many other countries are definately at least on par with the US as far as "freedom" is concerned IMO .

[Defiant]

Originally posted by alva
I never said I would (want to) outlaw any of things you say (except guns that is)

-
Ohh and eugh

Quote:

The same is true with alcohol, wish more people would not abuse it, I included at times, but to abolish it, is a greater evil.

They tried this somewhere, can't remember where though.

And could you explain why, say, cannabis is illegal in the US?
Isn't this a restriction on ones freedom?

Or just not your freedom?

Quote:

I view(biased) the United States as the freeist(sp) nation on Earth.

Me thinks many other countries are definately at least on par with the US as far as "freedom" is concerned IMO .

Ah yes the "weed", somewhere down the line most people decided that the "joint" is more dangerous than drinking, I really don't have the medical facts one way or the other. There is a line and it is very thin, how about legalizing crack or heroine, the line has to be drawn somewhere, like I said, by the general mass they decide, for better or worse, which items weigh too heavily on their freedoms vs. consequences.

Many people do want to outlaw our most basic freedoms, like Che, "lets outlaw all SUV's" Spoken like a true man who doesn't own one.

Yes, we all know that the USA tried to make drinking illegal and it didn't go over so well, we must revisit the past as not to repeat the same mistakes.

BTW, isn't it Europe or France that allows young children to drink wine or something, we might find that disgusting, feeding minors booze.

[alva]

There is a line and it is very thin, how about legalizing crack or heroine, the line has to be drawn somewhere, like I said, by the general mass they decide, for better or worse, which items weigh too heavily on their freedoms vs. consequences.

That's how I (and I'm sure too) feel about guns.
-

BTW, isn't it Europe or France that allows young children to drink wine or something, we might find that disgusting, feeding minors booze.

I think that the difference, here it's a social thing, not feeding kids liquor, besides, the earlier one learns something
( At the risk of repeating myself, but 'here' we would be shocked to see a young child take shooting lessons)
Different culture, different habits I guess.


WE are right of course

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Azazel
The air pollution of most cars is photochemical smog, these days, as people are getting less and less sulfur in their cars. Particle pollution is also a problem, but can be fixed with filters. The big problem is the Greenhouse effect created by the CO2. Some details: Gas cars WON'T solve the problem. while pollution will be close to zero, with no Sulfur in gas, and NOx levels to be fixed through more fine-tuning of the fuel-air mixture, the greenhouse effect will stay, through the immense inneficiency of internal combustion engines. In such conditions, fuel-cell engines, refueled through plugging into electricity at night, for example, even such that is produced through fossil fuels, will cause a dramatic decrease in CO2 output levels, since the CO2 output by cars will practically disappear from the equation. That happens since by refueling through the night, you're actually using an unused capacity of the fossil fuel power plants, that run "on neutral" through the night, as demand plummets. In this way, we'd be actually saving a lot of energy completely wasted otherwise.

This is, however, only an intermediate solution. The true solutions lie in Fuel cell cars powered by electricity for fusion.

Some would point out that I forgot about the renewable sources. well, I support using renewable sources whenever possible, like Hydropower or tidal power where possible. I do not believe in subsidizing green electricity, however. Cheap energy is possible, when we'll break the fusion problem. Investment in other green technology, unless it's really about to produce a sizeable chunk of our electricity, is futile.

The cost of than fuel cell car manufactor for the generl public would be between 1 to 5 million dollar per car. The problen with fuelcell car is how to storage hydrogen saftly and in the smaller amount of space.

[Az]

erhaps, on the other hand it does make people aware of these problems/solutions.

So wait, your only defence of fancy useless energy sources like standard wind and solar power is that creating them ensures people know they exist?



Solar power can be used to fill up certain very specific niches. The same is true about wind. They are of no real use macroeconomically, driving the economies of scale forward.

It's funny that such green power as hydro is being dissed so much by the greens, just because of the destruction of local animal habitat. It's another clear case of not seing the big picture.

[Lancer]

WooHoo! Hey Spiffor, when do I get me black PJs?



Defiant, freedom doesn't give you the right to drive a 4x4, it just gives you the right to ***** when it gets pulled out from under you.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Defiant
Alva,
I view(biased) the United States as the freeist(sp) nation on Earth.

How many have you been to?

[Defiant]

Lancer,
Freedom does give me the right to own a 4x4 until someone takes it away, and don't you own a couple of those jammies and hug a whold bunch of trees everyday.

[Defiant]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


How many have you been to?

15 why?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Azazel
It's funny that such green power as hydro is being dissed so much by the greens, just because of the destruction of local animal habitat.

Hydropower is very destructive. It pretty much kills the natural ecosystem up and down the river.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Defiant
15 why?

I wanted to know your sample size. Most folks make that statement never having left the country.

[Lancer]

I try not to get emotionally involved with wood. Tough sometimes...

As for me being a commie.

[Az]

Hydropower is very destructive. It pretty much kills the natural ecosystem up and down the river.

Oh no. The poor furry animals.



Rising carbon di-oxide levels = death of humanity.

humanity >> certain populations of animals that live near rivers.

[Az]

also, this is only true for reservoir type hydropower plants.

[Defiant]

edit

[alva]

So wait, your only defence of fancy useless energy sources like standard wind and solar power is that creating them ensures people know they exist?

I'd rather see one windmill then a 100 tv adverts.

And no, that's not my only defense

Hey, we could do nothing....

It's funny that such green power as hydro is being dissed so much by the greens, just because of the destruction of local animal habitat. It's another clear case of not seing the big picture.

Only animal???

[Tripledoc]

In some places the garbage is burned and the energy derived from that is then used to generate heat or electricity. Also in each individual home the citizens divide their garbage into bio-degradable (for agriculture), non-degradable (for burning generating energy), and poisonous (paint and batteries for instance).
Larger pieces of garbage (durable goods) is further subdivided into re-use or burning.

This combined with sufficient wind energy will go a long way. Each new generation windmill built will in its life time generate enough total energy to the building of three new windmills. So it is sustainable.

Also houses are built with smaller multi-paned windows and thicker walls. This also saves energy.

Remember that a single diode light, on your computer for instance, will in average cost you 8 euros per year. So shut it off at the power source.

[:) Smiley]

people need to stop overclocking

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Azazel
Solar power can be used to fill up certain very specific niches. The same is true about wind. They are of no real use macroeconomically, driving the economies of scale forward.

If each home can power itself via solar and wind power, you save a whole lot right there, no?

Sure, maybe they don't scale well, but you don't always need to think the same way.

[Hurricane]

Originally posted by CharlesBHoff
The cost of than fuel cell car manufactor for the generl public would be between 1 to 5 million dollar per car. The problen with fuelcell car is how to storage hydrogen saftly and in the smaller amount of space.

I think this says a lot about the current situation. The technology for being environment-friendly, without sacrificing our way of living, already exists. The problem is that much of this is more expensive than what we use now (of course, upgrading always costs). This is why the state should encourage this upgrading with excises and taxes on environment-unfriendly things. However, as it is now, with Bush taking huge donations from the oil and energy industry, change is going to be slow.