I just finished writing a research paper on alternative fuels and in my research I stumbled across this article: http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/...cle_13618.shtml
Enjoy.

How could some of u possibly have voted for this idiot? Baffles my mind.

Agreed with supersprynt


Supersprynt shoudl be president ;-) i like his thinking

I just hope humans die out before this planet is completely ****ed, or we find the right path before either of those thing's happen.....unlikely though, the idiots are definately taking over. Maybe the next evolution of sentient life will be smarter then us >>

Everytime I read stuff like this Im like that native American with a single tear rolling down his cheak.....

This post has been edited by Uppitycracker: Dec 10, 2004 - 2:41 PM

-Supersprynt+Dec 10, 2004 - 12:29 PM

I wish andason was still here, now its gonna be all one sided rant.

-coustoe+Dec 10, 2004 - 12:54 PM
How can you pretend Bush has good environmental policies, all other things aside. I dont care hes president or allll that other ****, just keep the subject on the environment.

'publicans tend to direct focus away from environmental issues when a conversation like this arises. I'll be Andason's stand in...

What does global warming matter if Osama Bin Ladin teams up with the Axis of Evil to nuke the planet?

-mr_dude+Dec 10, 2004 - 5:05 PM
hahah "Axis of Evil"...I love that, its like God fearing Crusaders vs. the Axis of evil!! Who will win?!?! dun dun dunnnn, find out next time on "My God is better then yours"!

I think its doubtful that a terrorist group would go to the length of using nuclear weapons, they have an aganda, and starting a nuclear war Im sure isn't one of them.

Secondly Nuclear weapons aren't easy bake ovens, you dont just plug em in and watch the magic. Yes Im sure there are sources for these types of weapons around the world but for the most part you need people with very technical know how to build and operate them, and most people with a few firing neurons in there head don't go on holy crusades to cleanse the infidels.

Besides the US are the only assholes to ever use nuclear weapons on innocent people and I don't see anyone doing anything about your nuclear stock piles? NOt every nation has an overwhelming sense of self importance...... >>


Besides what the good of saving the world from nuclear devistation if its to poluted to sustain life? >>

This post has been edited by Uppitycracker: Dec 10, 2004 - 7:47 PM

Better watch it or we'll add Canadia to the axis of evil. Then your maple syrup is going down.

heres an idea, we wil all be dead by that time that happens. who gives a ****, you guys are the ones taking off your cats and running straight throughs, you wanna bitch then make your car smog legal.


EDIT: No im not picking on Canada Uppity >>
also with global warming dont blame that **** on America, if you look at all the other countries they dont have restrictions on their cars or really anything. Take italy they are about to implement cats cause their old roman buildings are weakening by the smog. This isnt a one nation **** up, so quit yalls bitchn cause thats about all you guys ever do. Go stand for green peace or something. >>

This post has been edited by Sev408: Dec 10, 2004 - 8:26 PM

-Sev408+Dec 10, 2004 - 6:21 PM
Ya Im against removing or hollowing cats.

And ya its a global problem, alot of countries and industries need to start taking reponsibilty for the current state of the environment. Canada has alot of programs that protect our environment, but we also have a low populaion to land area ratio.

I think we are starting to see the silver lining of a new age in automobiles, highbreds are becoming ALOT more common and affordable, aswell as research into fuel cell technology.

Global warming is going to happen regardless who is in office, sorry people dont care about the environment, if y'all havent figured it out yet we live in a society that cares only about themselves first. We're a "Me" group of ppl. Thats the problem ppl now days dont care about others. A person like myself that would put myself in a bad situation to help out a friend is not that common. Sorry. So w/ a me group of ppl they could care less about the env. 200 years down the road.

-chucho+Dec 11, 2004 - 10:25 AM

I agree that a lot of people don't care, but they also don't fully understand the situation. If the government cared to inform the public, people would take the environment seriously. Why doesn't the government push for more research in alternative fuels? The oil industry has supported Bush since he entered politics. He wouldn't say no to an opportunity to drill for more oil in the Arctic. In the article it says what would happen if the ice cap melted b/c of global warming. Instead of supporting alternative fuels that do not contribute to global warming or pollution, Bush wants to keep oil companies in business.

-Rider+Dec 11, 2004 - 11:42 AM

This is a democracry and thus people vote with their $$$, stop buying SUVs/Trucks, Buy Hybrids/Electric, Dont get pissed off when Chevron opens a Hydrogen Gas station in your neighborhood (People, dont like new things).

For years, energy companies (yes US oil companies) and carmakers have come out with alternative fuel vehicles (natural gas/hydrogen/electric) but the consumer would rather plump up on cheap petrol.

Problem: people like cheap gas, and when gas prices go up to reflect the real envrinonmental/social/political cost people get mad at their representives and senators then they (politicans) in turn press for pro oil policies.

so are you mad about global warming? are you mad about the middle east? are you mad about pollution? Okay simple stop driving gas cars, and dish out the extra cash to buy the more expensive alternative fuels, support the infrastructure of new alternative fuel stations such as hydrogen and natural gas.

Would you buy a hybrid that goes 0-60 in 12 seconds or a hybrid truck that can only tow 1000 lbs? The public doesn't buy hybrids because they can't compete on the market (yet). The point of the article is that Bush's policies help oil companies and don't encourage innovation.

-Rider+Dec 12, 2004 - 2:11 PM
I would! I mean Ill always want a weekend sports car, but if I can help the environment and save money while Im at it, then sure. Also hybrids aren't always going to be slow, as the technology advances we're going to see hybrids that can take on any straight combustion car. Electric motors can put out massive amounts of torque and much more efficiently then combustion engines.

-coustoe+Dec 12, 2004 - 3:54 PM

I don't want to get in the middle of this but that hits on a pet peeve of mine. democracy is not synonymous with capitalism or vice versa.

*cough*

now back to your regularly scheduled programming ..

It can also be said that the US is a representative republic but that doesn't mean people will listen to us.

-Uppitycracker+Dec 12, 2004 - 5:51 PM

I agree, hybrids will become better. I will probably own one too in the future. That wasn't the point the author of the article was making though. It was about the Bush administration downplaying the effects of climate warming. This is how I see it, feel free to prove me wrong:

1. Bush and oil companies are excited about new oil reserves in the Arctic.
2. The melting of the Arctic ice creates new shipping channels for oil transport.
3. Bush downplays the effects of global warming because the melting of the ice results in easier access to new oil reserves.
4. New oil reserves reduce the need for alternative fuels and innovation.
5. New oil reserves lower price for oil, which increases the demand for SUV's and large vehicles.
6. The public continues to buy traditional vehicles because oil is cheap and hybrids/electric cars/hydrogen cars are expensive.
7. Everybody is happy....right?

I think the important question is, what should we do about it?
Join 1GPriuses.net? Try and convince others to ditch their SUVs? Nuke the Red States?

Natural gas, that's the way to go right now. Then we move to hydrogen fuel cells. It will happen within most of our lifetimes. Just the same with the 2nd American revolution, or what ever they'll call it then.

In respect to alternate fuel/hybrid cars. They are relatively new and its naive to think that its going to be this gigantic switch over to them. I want an SUV right now - I can afford to drive it & I live in the northeast here we have some rough winters, I dont want a hybrid civic or Prius. If a hybrid SUV came along that wasnt Ford (Escape Hybrid) and I could afford it, I'd get it.

But I will not go into $20,000 in debt for an alternate fuel car, neither will anybody else.

-Supersprynt+Dec 13, 2004 - 6:10 AM
I think thats why he said "in mostof our life times" because say in 50 years we will see a dramatic increase in the alternative fuel and hybrid cars. It all has to do with the cost of them and thats already coming down quite a bit.

Fuel cell technology is being developed full steam by most car manufacturers, the idea isn't as simple as hybrids and has some fundamental flaws like not being useful near or below freezing, but these are problems that Im sure will be easily worked out.