|
Title: Bush calls for conservation Post by: gilld1 on September 27, 2005, 08:18:32 PM The most fiscally irresponsible President of all time, champion pork spender himself has asked all Americans to drive less and conserve fuel as he and his staff jet all around the country for fundraisers and photo ops. What a joke...
Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 27, 2005, 08:37:15 PM It is a joke, but I will agree with him. Although we don't need a tragedy to conserve. We should have been, and continue to conserve for good. Energy is no laughing matter. Especially when our kids are marched off to die for it. I conserve water, electricity, gas, as much as I am able.
W advising us to conserve energy is like Michael Jackson consoling the victims of sexual abuse..... Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: deliverthecow on September 27, 2005, 09:41:17 PM W advising us to conserve energy is like Michael Jackson consoling the victims of sexual abuse..... Classic !!!!! Can i use that as a signature on another board ??? :rofl: Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 27, 2005, 10:34:59 PM haha, sure dude. Which board I'd love to see it in action... :hihi:
Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: Timothy on September 27, 2005, 11:19:15 PM W advising us to conserve energy is like Michael Jackson consoling the victims of sexual abuse..... :hihi: :hihi: That's fuckin' classic. : ok: Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: gilld1 on September 28, 2005, 01:12:54 AM SLC shoots and scores...
I am not belittling the advice itself because we do need to do this but isn't ol' W about 4 or 5 years too late on this? He also gave extra $ to the oil companies, I guess profits in the billions can't offset some of these contruction and clean up costs?! Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 01:22:14 AM I am not belittling the advice itself because we do need to do this but isn't ol' W about 4 or 5 years too late on this? He also gave extra $ to the oil companies, I guess profits in the billions can't offset some of these contruction and clean up costs?! I agree 100 percent. The advice is ironic, hypocritical in nature, and late. Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: shades on September 28, 2005, 11:44:43 AM having to ask you to conserve is whats sad.
Finding that someone asking you to conserve troubling is itself troubling. If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 12:47:14 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: pilferk on September 28, 2005, 01:08:13 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. In addition, given it would be removed from US soil, less than 2/3 of it would have actually made it's way to market. The other third would go toward our "oil reserves" (you know, the ones that it takes a natural disaster for Bush to release...and even then he has to be prodded into action.....and STILL that oil he promised from the reserves has not made it into the market). Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 01:09:41 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. In addition, given it would be removed from US soil, less than 2/3 of it would have actually made it's way to market. The other third would go toward our "oil reserves" (you know, the ones that it takes a natural disaster for Bush to release...and even then he has to be prodded into action.....and STILL that oil he promised from the reserves has not made it into the market). There you go with all those facts again..... Will you ever stop with your antics? Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: Axls Locomotive on September 28, 2005, 03:15:42 PM well which countries will come to a stand still when oil runs out...thats something you should worry about...wont be much longer now
Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: shades on September 28, 2005, 03:35:17 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. In addition, given it would be removed from US soil, less than 2/3 of it would have actually made it's way to market.? The other third would go toward our "oil reserves" (you know, the ones that it takes a natural disaster for Bush to release...and even then he has to be prodded into action.....and STILL that oil he promised from the reserves has not made it into the market). where do you come up with these things. you dont know that nor does anyone else. The liberals wont even help finance a study to find , in all likelyhood enough oil to make us self sufficent. No one can take oil from your land or force you to put it on the world market. Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: Kitano on September 28, 2005, 03:38:31 PM It is a joke, but I will agree with him. Although we don't need a tragedy to conserve. We should have been, and continue to conserve for good. Energy is no laughing matter. Especially when our kids are marched off to die for it. I conserve water, electricity, gas, as much as I am able. W advising us to conserve energy is like Michael Jackson consoling the victims of sexual abuse..... Using victims of sexual abuse to take a cheap shot at the President. Very classy. : ok: Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 03:41:46 PM well which countries will come to a stand still when oil runs out...thats something you should worry about...wont be much longer now It is what will happen before that, that we should worry about. The entire world relies on oil!!! Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 03:45:02 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. In addition, given it would be removed from US soil, less than 2/3 of it would have actually made it's way to market. The other third would go toward our "oil reserves" (you know, the ones that it takes a natural disaster for Bush to release...and even then he has to be prodded into action.....and STILL that oil he promised from the reserves has not made it into the market). where do you come up with these things. The Energy Information Administration. Where do you come up with yours? Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: Axls Locomotive on September 28, 2005, 04:16:45 PM well which countries will come to a stand still when oil runs out...thats something you should worry about...wont be much longer now It is what will happen before that, that we should worry about. The entire world relies on oil!!! i wouldnt be too sure of that, there are alternatives, wind water solar and nuclear energy will keep the essentials running but would the return to an agricultural lifestyle be such a bad thing? Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 04:51:37 PM 1) Once the economies are hurting it is going to be difficult to put money into these new programs. We are woefully behind already on them. Ironically a heavy conservation program (assuming everybody took part) would drive the cost of oil down, then putting off a demand for alternative energy sources.
2) We need to look the scale of the power we need: The amount of energy created by one gas station in a single day is equal to the amount (that could be produced) from four Manhattan sized blocks of solar panels. Think about that! http://www.energybulletin.net/3624.html 3) Nuclear energy requires uranium which we are in short supply of. It would take 10,000 large nuclear plants to match the power generated by fossil fuel NOW. Take into consideration also the construction of these plants at about 3-5 billion each. Then to retrofit cars, airplanes homes etc to run on nuclear energy and the cost is huge. http://www.energybulletin.net/2311.html 4) We are behind on every single source we can imagine. The crunch is when we need a change, and the price of oil is screaming upwards, making everything more pricy, putting a strain on the economy and then we will just start thinking about alternative fuel. By then it will be too late. How much money and time will it take to build all this? It's not as easy as a snap of the finger, signing a few bills, and forking over the money. I wish somebody would take charge on this and act now. We may have a chance. If not I think we could be headed for something huge on this planet. Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: Axls Locomotive on September 28, 2005, 06:11:31 PM 1) Once the economies are hurting it is going to be difficult to put money into these new programs. We are woefully behind already on them. Ironically a heavy conservation program (assuming everybody took part) would drive the cost of oil down, then putting off a demand for alternative energy sources. 2) We need to look the scale of the power we need: The amount of energy created by one gas station in a single day is equal to the amount (that could be produced) from four Manhattan sized blocks of solar panels. Think about that! http://www.energybulletin.net/3624.html 3) Nuclear energy requires uranium which we are in short supply of. It would take 10,000 large nuclear plants to match the power generated by fossil fuel NOW. Take into consideration also the construction of these plants at about 3-5 billion each. Then to retrofit cars, airplanes homes etc to run on nuclear energy and the cost is huge. http://www.energybulletin.net/2311.html 4) We are behind on every single source we can imagine. The crunch is when we need a change, and the price of oil is screaming upwards, making everything more pricy, putting a strain on the economy and then we will just start thinking about alternative fuel. By then it will be too late. How much money and time will it take to build all this? It's not as easy as a snap of the finger, signing a few bills, and forking over the money. I wish somebody would take charge on this and act now. We may have a chance. If not I think we could be headed for something huge on this planet. scotland is targetting a level of 40% of renewable energy sources by 2020 based on current technologies...thats a pretty good figure the world is fucked anyway...yes uranium is in short supply...probably enough to last 50 years at current rates of usage, oil not much more than 60-80 years...coal wont last long either...youll have to pedal on a bike to generate enough energy t use your playstation...well at least itll keep couch potatoes fit much of that energy is used for pointless things anyway cos people have no respect for what they use...when it comes to being in short supply then theyll find out just how precious that fuel "was"... Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: SLCPUNK on September 28, 2005, 06:15:46 PM I should move to Scotland in a few years..... :P
Title: Re: Bush calls for conservation Post by: pilferk on September 28, 2005, 07:00:53 PM If the liberals wold have let the man drill in Alaska we wouldnt be having this discussion. Damned if we do, damned if we dont. The oil in Alaska would hardly make an effect on this. It contains 10 billion barrels of oil - about the amount the US consumes in a little more than a year. In addition, given it would be removed from US soil, less than 2/3 of it would have actually made it's way to market.? The other third would go toward our "oil reserves" (you know, the ones that it takes a natural disaster for Bush to release...and even then he has to be prodded into action.....and STILL that oil he promised from the reserves has not made it into the market). where do you come up with these things. you dont know that nor does anyone else. The liberals wont even help finance a study to find , in all likelyhood? enough oil to make us self sufficent. No one can take oil from your land or force you to put it on the world market. And since you quoted me...and not SLC... The fact that 1/3 of all oil produced on US shores goes to reserve is a well documented fact...but I ain't doing any more research for you. The fact that GW promised the release of oil reserves after Katrina is a well documented fact...but I ain't doing any more research for you. The fact that the promised reserves have not yet made it to market is a well documented fact...but I ain't doing any more research for you. Use google. It's your friend. |