On a similar note:Disclaimer: I don't think that the republicans would really nominate or vote for Voldemort, even if he does remind me of Dick Cheney
Make it Nuclear!
The first fusion power plant isn't expected to go on-line until 2050, and IFMIF and ITER aren't even properly running yet. Unfortunately for perhaps a lot of the world, the US, Russia, Canada and Australia have few concerns about coal shortages. Economics will force nuclear power back onto the stage, and some previously anti-nuke types are finally seeing the light.
Coal liquefaction and shale will probably help, at least the United States, though the final answer is probably going to be algaculture.
In my opinion, the future of nuclear isn't more reactors like we have now... or even fusion. It's micro reactors like this one here
. The smaller size makes it safer, it has the potential to be cheaper then current energy solutions, and perhaps best of all... it's a long ways in the future, but eventually, combined with other tech, it could help to de-centralize our nations power grid. Having a few big power plants serving large areas has significant downsides... transmitting electricity over long distances means a lot of power is lost just on the transmission... and anyone remember when half the east coast had a blackout a few years ago? If every town generated it's own power, something like that would be virtually impossible. In fact, theres a remote town in Alaska
that's already in the planning stages of installing on of these!
This is something I read on another forum. I like it alot and I actually agree with most of it.
Which ever candidate first gives this
speech, will get my vote.
I don't have anything to much to say in response that hasn't already been said better then I could, so I'll just keep it short: No... please... I know it's an ultimatum that's been much overused in the last few years... but if a candidate who made this speech was ever elected... I would seriously consider moving overseas.
I'm not sure the electric car is the panacea that some put it out to be. The size of batteries needed are large and over time, do degrade. They aren't cheap to replace either. Where a internal combustion engine can run for decades with decent maintinence.
There's also the problem where are they coulg to get the electricity needed to recharge it? On hybrids, I understand the internal combustion engine can recharge it, but on a pure electric car? I know that I would not let anyone plug one of those things into a wall socket at my house for a recharge. I'm not goign to get stuck with the electricity bill that recharge would make.
Which brings up the question of where would all of the electricity come from? A nation wide roll out of electric cars means much higher electrical demand. Especially in the summer months when demand is higher.
Hydrogen isn't an easy answer either. It takes a good amount of electricity to break water into oxygen and hydrogen. Plus, hydrogen isn't as efficent as gas is in an engine. You'd either need bigger tanks or make more stops. smaller engines will only go so far when you need a decent sized vehical to carry the family or a truck for work. Plus you can't move hydrogen in pipes. It has to be moved by tanker trucks/trains. Since it has a tendacy to absorb water. Making it more likely to rust and/or freeze in an engine of fuel line.
Like it or not, we need oil as the fuel of this ecnomy. It's out there if we just have the will to get it.
I strongly disagree with all of this... we don't need the will to get oil, we need the will to get OFF of oil. Global warming IS a serious problem, no matter how much people try to deny it... and I challenge anyone here to say it's "too expensive" to change, or it's "not that big a problem" after reading this
, or this
... I can just see the conversation at the UN... Country A: "It's not economically feasible for my country to reduce emissions by that much." Tiny Country B: "Well, it's even less economically feasible for my country to be swallowed up by the rising sees, so figure something out!" We have the potential to create a country that dosn't burn an ounce of oil, THATS what we need the will for. Seriously, besides nuclear, theres wind (admittedly not a complete solution, but definatly something that could make a significant contribution), [img=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power]http://tidal power
[/img] (Beginning to show some real potential, and unlike wind and solar, it's fairly reliable... it's not like the tides are going to stop coming anytime soon), even solar (These
new flexible solar panels are much, much cheaper then previous solar technology, and able to be applied to almost any surface... the only problem is, the company is still small... they're sold out for the next 12 months! Just think, if we would invest in this rather then the war... Every new house in the US with a solar roof, generating a sizable portion of it's electricity... every new electric car with these on the roof... with the cost these things are at already, it's possible, and they can still go a lot lower if they can truly mass produce them... this has the potential to be huge.)
Anyway, now that I've gotten that out of my system, I'll say SOMETHING thats on topic... Honestly, if John McCain was the same politician he was a couple years ago, I'd seriously consider voting for him... I didn't agree with everything he said, but I could at least respect him for being honest about his views, even when they conflicted with the leadership of his party. Now, though, he's going back on so much of what he used to say, just to appease the party base it seems, and it's honestly really disappointing. :/