wrote in message
...

On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 11:05:24 AM UTC-4, X ` Man wrote:
On 6/26/12 10:53 AM, wrote:
On Tuesday, June 26, 2012 10:15:56 AM UTC-4, North Star wrote:
On Jun 26, 9:51 am, Oscar wrote:
On 6/26/2012 8:36 AM, iBoaterer wrote:





In article , says...

On 6/25/2012 6:51 PM, Oscar wrote:
On 6/25/2012 5:44 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2012 02:02:29 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:

wrote in
messagenews:e78eu79sv2re36jrsl1rshc0hoei5m8cni@4ax .com...

You are making the same argument that automobiles will never
replace
horses. Electricity is likely to be the next fuel, but one thing
is a
sure thing: petroleum is going out.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Not for quite a while, I don't think.

Electricity and battery powered automobiles are simply examples
of
energy generated by other means
and converted to electricity and/or stored in batteries. If the
current fascination with
"green", electric powered cars grows, we will see the cost of
generating the energy required
to charge them rise. The bulk of raw energy is still in the
form of
fossil fuels and the conversion
process adds additional energy and cost requirements.

Those who think they are being "green" by driving a battery
powered
car have been fed a
line of BS. It might make them feel good or give them some sense
of
being environmentally
friendly, but the truth is they are more environmentally
"unfriendly"
than friendly.
Lithium Ion batteries are the best technology we have to date and
they
are an environmental
hazard the likes of which we haven't yet to fully experience.

Solar and wind can't come close to meeting the demand and nuclear
is
still a political
hot potato. Here's where the energy used to produce electricity
in
the USA comes from:

http://mapawatt.com/wp-content/uploa...eneration_sour...

Eisboch

All of that seems quite obvious. Batteries will likely NOT be the
most
efficient storage medium, but that doesn't mean that they
shouldn't be
used in the interim.

Oil is on its way out. Period.

Unless somebody can give me a viable alternative, I'm sticking
with
electricity as the next fuel.

Electricity is a product made from mostly fossil fuels.

Shhhhh, that's not as impressive at the cocktail parties...

You stupid fool! I guess you've never heard of hydroelectric,
nuclear,
solar, wind, etc.? Or is it that FOX or your insanity is telling you
that they don't exist?

You're the fool. With the exception of nuclear, the generators you
mention are VERY MINOR players. Your arguments are not arguments at
all.
Just cries for attention.

What are you babbling about?
In a few short years of building we now get almost 30% of our
electricity generated from windmills and hopefully the remainder when
we can figure out how to harness the power of the Fundy tides.
Renewable endless supply... much more than this province will ever
need. Maybe we'll sell a few megawatts to y'all south of the border.

What are you babbling about?
In the scheme of things, your province isn't even a speck on the
electricity map.

Besides: "At the end of 2011, wind power generating capacity was 5,265
megawatts (MW), providing some 2.3% of Canada's electricity demand."

"In provinces like Nova Scotia, where only 12% of electricity comes from
renewable sources..."

I think this is much more interesting: "Renewable energy in the United
States accounted for 14.3 percent of the domestically produced electricity
in the first six months of 2011.[1] Hydroelectricity is the largest producer
of renewable power in the United States. In 2009, the U.S. was the world's
largest producer of electricity from geothermal, solar and wind power and it
trailed only China in the total production of renewable energy."

Sounds like the good old USA is doing pretty well.


--------------------------------
Not really. There is not another big hydroelectric generating location to
build on. The Northwest is talking about taking out some of the low
production, silting up dams on the Snake River as they are environmental
disasters in the making as well as impeding the salmon runs. Nuclear is
dead for at least 50 years after the Japanese disaster. And I do not see
Fusion power generation for at least 50 years. Next year is probably the
first viable fusion test at Livermore labs. But using a laser and deuterium
pellets makes for probably a low overall efficiency process. We need a lot
more electric generation just to keep up with all the Ipads, and phone
chargers as well as the AC and heating of homes. We have brown outs in the
west during heat waves now.