You better take an economics course. We would have a depression at least as
big as 1929.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
What are you going to do
about the energy requirements of the West?


Supply and demand! Simple as that. If we don't have it, we can't
use it.


Very correct. So we buy it and turn it in to a very good lifestyle.
You
think you would be employed if we ran out of energy? How many
buildings and
bridges would be designed and built? We require it for our economy.
How
are you going to supply the energy to run this country and the
economic
engine?

Yes, I'd be employed. There would be just as much work designing new,
more energy efficient buildings. There would be new technologies
sprouting up to meet energy requirements using alternative means. A
novel idea, our economy could suffice on NEW technology. The right wing
just wants to keep us in the dark ages, as always. Hell, when motor
cars first started appearing, people NEVER thought they'd replace the
horse. Especially on farms. How many horses do you see on working,
profitable farms today?

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...
You better take an economics course. We would have a depression at least
as
big as 1929.


Once again, asslicker proves why he is the "KING of the NG idiots"

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
What are you going to do
about the energy requirements of the West?


Supply and demand! Simple as that. If we don't have it, we can't
use it.


Very correct. So we buy it and turn it in to a very good lifestyle.
You
think you would be employed if we ran out of energy? How many
buildings and
bridges would be designed and built? We require it for our economy.
How
are you going to supply the energy to run this country and the
economic
engine?

Yes, I'd be employed. There would be just as much work designing new,
more energy efficient buildings. There would be new technologies
sprouting up to meet energy requirements using alternative means. A
novel idea, our economy could suffice on NEW technology. The right wing
just wants to keep us in the dark ages, as always. Hell, when motor
cars first started appearing, people NEVER thought they'd replace the
horse. Especially on farms. How many horses do you see on working,
profitable farms today?

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:39:29 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:

You better take an economics course. We would have a depression at least
as big as 1929.

Have you heard of the Olduvai Theory? I'm not saying it's accurate, but
it does provide food for thought.

http://dieoff.com/page224.htm

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future, but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To survive, we are going to have to learn to
live within the constraints of this planet, whatever they may be.

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future, but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To

Nuclear energy is not unsustainable. It takes a miniscule amount of nuclear
material (U-233, U-235, and Pu-239) to create a sustainable fissile
reaction.

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and
solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the
only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future,
but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To

Nuclear energy is not unsustainable. It takes a miniscule amount of
nuclear material (U-233, U-235, and Pu-239) to create a sustainable
fissile reaction.


Mind if we bury the waste in your town?

"NOYB" wrote in message
. net...

Remove the other nations competing for the oil from the face of the map.
That should free up another 5 decades of the stuff.



.......or..if the super wasteful US was removed from the equation...the
supply might last another millennium.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots
of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and
solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the
only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future,
but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To

Nuclear energy is not unsustainable. It takes a miniscule amount of
nuclear material (U-233, U-235, and Pu-239) to create a sustainable
fissile reaction.


Mind if we bury the waste in your town?

Once we pump all of the oil out of the ground in the Middle East, we can
pump it underground in the vacant caves.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots
of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and
solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the
only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future,
but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To

Nuclear energy is not unsustainable. It takes a miniscule amount of
nuclear material (U-233, U-235, and Pu-239) to create a sustainable
fissile reaction.


Mind if we bury the waste in your town?



There are places in the US where we can safely bury the waste. As to high
level waste, there is really very little of it. As to radiation pollution,
coal mining and burning releases exponentially more radiation than Nuclear
plants.
There are stable mountains in Nevada, Salt Mines in several other states.
Encased in lead and glass, makes for a stable storage package. If you are
going to live within the constraints of the energy available to us with out
fission or fusion, then figure about 1/2 the people on earth will have to
leave. Oil and natural gas is also used for plastic, medicine, fertilizer
outside the energy area. Thunder asked about the Olduvai Theory, is a
theory same as a lot of theories. Is not a given or provable. There is
going to be a major upheaval in the world as oil production decreases.
Middle East will be a violent place, and we will have to fend them off.
They get their food and manufactured goods from the West and East now. But
with no oil money, there are going to have to try to take over arable lands
outside their area. They have not done well in the last 2000 years since
they started as the cradle of civilization, been going downhill since. They
could learn from the Israelis on how to produce food in less than ideal
conditions and with brackish water. But religion and extremists prevent
that. 50-100 years from now will be very interesting times for mankind.
Hope they survive.

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

"NOYB" wrote in message
.net...

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:42:10 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


I will answer yours even though you avoid answering mine. Build lots
of
nuclear power plants. Same thing we should be doing now. Wind and
solar
are not efficient enough to supply the countries needs. Then we
could
save the oil for the items that require them. And energy is not the
only
use of petroleum.

I would agree that nuclear energy has an important role in our future,
but
we must be careful. Switching from one unsustainable energy source to
another is not the answer. To

Nuclear energy is not unsustainable. It takes a miniscule amount of
nuclear material (U-233, U-235, and Pu-239) to create a sustainable
fissile reaction.


Mind if we bury the waste in your town?



There are places in the US where we can safely bury the waste. As to high
level waste, there is really very little of it. As to radiation
pollution,
coal mining and burning releases exponentially more radiation than Nuclear
plants.
There are stable mountains in Nevada, Salt Mines in several other states.
Encased in lead and glass, makes for a stable storage package. If you are
going to live within the constraints of the energy available to us with
out
fission or fusion, then figure about 1/2 the people on earth will have to
leave. Oil and natural gas is also used for plastic, medicine, fertilizer
outside the energy area. Thunder asked about the Olduvai Theory, is a
theory same as a lot of theories. Is not a given or provable. There is
going to be a major upheaval in the world as oil production decreases.
Middle East will be a violent place, and we will have to fend them off.
They get their food and manufactured goods from the West and East now.
But
with no oil money, there are going to have to try to take over arable
lands
outside their area. They have not done well in the last 2000 years since
they started as the cradle of civilization, been going downhill since.
They
could learn from the Israelis on how to produce food in less than ideal
conditions and with brackish water. But religion and extremists prevent
that. 50-100 years from now will be very interesting times for mankind.
Hope they survive.

The end of oil reservees in the near future has been predicted for years.
THe fact is that there are fstill plenty of sources that are currnetly not
economical to develop. As the readily available sources become scarcer,
those known deposits will become economically viable, as will alternate
energy sources.......synthetics, etc.