Vito wrote:
"twoguns" wrote

...... The big problem in the next
few years is going to be IF there is enough oil available


Nope! There is just as much oil (and air and water and ....) now as there
was 100 years ago. There are too many people using it.


I wish our leaders would have been wise enough 30 years ago to
recognize that alternative clean and renewable power sources were going
to be needed but they weren't.


I wish PEOPLE had been wise enough to realize we needed to limit population.

Why expect leaders to invent new band aids when they cannot see the root
problem and take steps to mitigate it.


The problem is political decisions made at the behest of business
interests who don't give a damn about anything other than profit,
and tax breaks. Why they need another billion is beyond me. Any
business big enough to seriously affect the economy must be
regulated by someone with the population's best interest at heart.

Party politics is to blame. Once elected, politicians should be
required to serve their constituents, not toe the party line. Elect
independants if you want to see individuals put before corporations.

There is only one taxpayer. Party line governments kowtow to
industry to redirect routing of tax money to the benefit of those
with the most influence. The rich get richer, the poorest get
screwed the worst.

The masses will eventually get ****ed off enough to kill a few
corrupt politicians, cops, and lawyers, and their benefactor /
benefitees, then we will have equity for a while, until some one
else comes along with subtle plans to skim the cream again.

Not providing enough product to satisfy the demand is a sure fire
profit booster. Why does not Petro Canada take over the refining
industry? The oil belongs to the people, not some goon with a
license to steal.

This method is not really subtle, but the machinations they go
through to ensure they are not permitted to increase refinery
capactity satisfactorily would be, if we could detect their efforts
and reason out how they arrange convenient protests to defend their
interests, pupeteering environmentalists to prevent competition.

It is the politicians who benefit from their ability to manipulate
the spin.

Audits will show the truth, but who will take action to fix it?

On the other hand, environmentalists would have a role, if they
weren't so dippy as to think baby seals are more important than
codfish entrees for people.

If unlimited nuclear, (presuming subduction or the rocks from which
the uranium is mined could continue to contain glassified
radioactive waste materials for another billion years or so,) is the
way to go, then the end result would be plain heat generation, not
runaway greenhouse effect. If that is a problem, the answer is, of
course, efficiency. Use less. Insulate better. Accelleate slower,
decellerate regeneratively. Return to railroads for mass transport.

Alternative generation and excess power storage is not a problem, it
is just not developed. Hydrogen gas made from solar powered
electroysis can be stored just as natural gas can be. If pure
hydrogen is too difficult, combine it with a little carbon to make
methane, which liquifies more easily, and can be used for vehicles,
if you refuse H2 dirigibles. On land, huge bladders or caverns
could contain moderate reserves of H2 easily and cheaply. Further,
wild H2 fires are less hazardous than most think, since a leak in a
bladder would simply allow H2 to rise as opposed to pool. H2 will
not explode unless mixed with oxygen.

We have the technology, what we lack is firm controlled development,
which is hampered exclusively by oil company profiteers.

Nationalize them! Or, threaten to do it as a bargaining chip. Jail
the profiteersing national plunderers.

Terry K