On Mar 1, 3:26*pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:01:04 -0500, Gene Kearns





wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:52:23 -0500, BAR wrote:

Solution:

- build nuclear power plants
- build the wind farm off of Cape Cod
- drill to pump oil out of all of the oil fields within the US
- drill the hell out of the coast of Florida before the Chinese do
- build more refineries

I'll plagiarize that every chance I get.

Don't make yourself look silly.....

1) I pay bills at 2 locations: one coal fired, one nukular fired. The
nukular bill is about 1/3 higher. That isn't much of a "deal." I,
also, have a problem with sweeping the radioactive waste under the
carpet.

Which provides the cleaner energy? What other monies will be spent to clean
up after the coal? Is the difference in price due to the difference in
production cost or for some other reason?

2) I don't mind ****ing off the Kennedy's, but geographically I hope
it is not cutting off one's nose to spite one's face (the studies say,
not). Wind is a good way to go, though, and I suspect that the project
will be approved this year and we may see a turbine in place in about
4 years....

We are way behind. Take a trip through Denmark. You'll see what wind use is
all about. I don't believe it's possible to stop anywhere in the country
and not see a wind mill farm.

3) We might need those reserves for something regarding national
defense. Don't squander the nest egg for a big night on the town....

Don't know if he meant to pump out the old fields or drill and pump new
ones. You made a good point. Once things really get tight, we'll need the
oil to power our bombers and submarines.

4) Another geographically challenged thought.

But one that makes good sense. Do you think the Chinese are *not* working
with the Cubans to drill off the coast of Florida?

5) Tell the oil companies to stop CLOSING refineries. Has anybody
figured out that we have 1/2 the refineries we used to have and that
"lack of capacity" has the oil companies weeping all of the way to the
bank?

The oil companies closed old, small, inefficient refineries.

Certainly, America can develop technologies that will make oil
unnecessary. Then we would have an economic advantage far exceeding of
the current countries with significant oil reserves.

Go NUCLEAR!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree, but the problem is that it isn't an instant fix by a long
shot. It takes a hell of a long time to get a nuke plant built, and
online. Was watching an economist and energy expert talking about this
just today, and he, like me is all for nuclear energy, but in the
meantime thinks, as do I that we need to do more to get solar and wind
farms up and running to offset the lag time in getting nuke plants
operational.

On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:16:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Mar 1, 3:26*pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:01:04 -0500, Gene Kearns





wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:52:23 -0500, BAR wrote:

Solution:

- build nuclear power plants
- build the wind farm off of Cape Cod
- drill to pump oil out of all of the oil fields within the US
- drill the hell out of the coast of Florida before the Chinese do
- build more refineries

I'll plagiarize that every chance I get.

Don't make yourself look silly.....

1) I pay bills at 2 locations: one coal fired, one nukular fired. The
nukular bill is about 1/3 higher. That isn't much of a "deal." I,
also, have a problem with sweeping the radioactive waste under the
carpet.

Which provides the cleaner energy? What other monies will be spent to clean
up after the coal? Is the difference in price due to the difference in
production cost or for some other reason?

2) I don't mind ****ing off the Kennedy's, but geographically I hope
it is not cutting off one's nose to spite one's face (the studies say,
not). Wind is a good way to go, though, and I suspect that the project
will be approved this year and we may see a turbine in place in about
4 years....

We are way behind. Take a trip through Denmark. You'll see what wind use is
all about. I don't believe it's possible to stop anywhere in the country
and not see a wind mill farm.

3) We might need those reserves for something regarding national
defense. Don't squander the nest egg for a big night on the town....

Don't know if he meant to pump out the old fields or drill and pump new
ones. You made a good point. Once things really get tight, we'll need the
oil to power our bombers and submarines.

4) Another geographically challenged thought.

But one that makes good sense. Do you think the Chinese are *not* working
with the Cubans to drill off the coast of Florida?

5) Tell the oil companies to stop CLOSING refineries. Has anybody
figured out that we have 1/2 the refineries we used to have and that
"lack of capacity" has the oil companies weeping all of the way to the
bank?

The oil companies closed old, small, inefficient refineries.

Certainly, America can develop technologies that will make oil
unnecessary. Then we would have an economic advantage far exceeding of
the current countries with significant oil reserves.

Go NUCLEAR!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree, but the problem is that it isn't an instant fix by a long
shot. It takes a hell of a long time to get a nuke plant built, and
online. Was watching an economist and energy expert talking about this
just today, and he, like me is all for nuclear energy, but in the
meantime thinks, as do I that we need to do more to get solar and wind
farms up and running to offset the lag time in getting nuke plants
operational.

Loogy, you should have started talking to the liberals about 20 years ago!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Mar 1, 4:20*pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:16:03 -0800 (PST), wrote:
On Mar 1, 3:26*pm, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:01:04 -0500, Gene Kearns

wrote:
On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 13:29:41 -0500, John H. penned the following well
considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:52:23 -0500, BAR wrote:

Solution:

- build nuclear power plants
- build the wind farm off of Cape Cod
- drill to pump oil out of all of the oil fields within the US
- drill the hell out of the coast of Florida before the Chinese do
- build more refineries

I'll plagiarize that every chance I get.

Don't make yourself look silly.....

1) I pay bills at 2 locations: one coal fired, one nukular fired. The
nukular bill is about 1/3 higher. That isn't much of a "deal." I,
also, have a problem with sweeping the radioactive waste under the
carpet.

Which provides the cleaner energy? What other monies will be spent to clean
up after the coal? Is the difference in price due to the difference in
production cost or for some other reason?

2) I don't mind ****ing off the Kennedy's, but geographically I hope
it is not cutting off one's nose to spite one's face (the studies say,
not). Wind is a good way to go, though, and I suspect that the project
will be approved this year and we may see a turbine in place in about
4 years....

We are way behind. Take a trip through Denmark. You'll see what wind use is
all about. I don't believe it's possible to stop anywhere in the country
and not see a wind mill farm.

3) We might need those reserves for something regarding national
defense. Don't squander the nest egg for a big night on the town....

Don't know if he meant to pump out the old fields or drill and pump new
ones. You made a good point. Once things really get tight, we'll need the
oil to power our bombers and submarines.

4) Another geographically challenged thought.

But one that makes good sense. Do you think the Chinese are *not* working
with the Cubans to drill off the coast of Florida?

5) Tell the oil companies to stop CLOSING refineries. Has anybody
figured out that we have 1/2 the refineries we used to have and that
"lack of capacity" has the oil companies weeping all of the way to the
bank?

The oil companies closed old, small, inefficient refineries.

Certainly, America can develop technologies that will make oil
unnecessary. Then we would have an economic advantage far exceeding of
the current countries with significant oil reserves.

Go NUCLEAR!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I agree, but the problem is that it isn't an instant fix by a long
shot. It takes a hell of a long time to get a nuke plant built, and
online. Was watching an economist and energy expert talking about this
just today, and he, like me is all for nuclear energy, but in the
meantime thinks, as do I that we need to do more to get solar and wind
farms up and running to offset the lag time in getting nuke plants
operational.

Loogy, you should have started talking to the liberals about 20 years ago!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You'd be surprised how many liberals are for those exact same things.
It's just that you on the right side (as well as many on the left)
tend to lump everyone together that doesn't 100% toe the line, ie:
you're either with us, or against us.