Comments on: Environmentalists Recommend Eating Your Dog Before Getting Rid of SUV

By: someotherguy

someotherguy — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 01:36:53 +0000

Depends on the type of batteries. I'm not talking alkaline, LiIon, or NMH here. Those types eventually wear out and need replacing. Super capacitors are used all the time for large amounts of energy storage, but currently they are huge and only reasonable at power stations and other fixed facilities.

By: gerry

gerry — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:19:00 +0000

And what do you do with 300lbs of used up batteries when the vehicle goes to the junk yard? Multiply that by 100 million vehicles.

I think the envirimental problems will quickly become as disasterous as fossil fuels.

By: someotherguy

someotherguy — Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:56:42 +0000

I know its a bit of a necro bumb, but we don't have the technology for all electric vehicles yet. The problem is with the battery, we can't get a high enough energy density just yet. The real reason we use carbon based fuels (gasoline / diesel / jet fuel) as a portable fuel source is because it packs a LARGE amount of energy in a small size. Thus we can go farther and faster for the same amount of mass.

By: Leon LaPorte

Leon LaPorte — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 03:35:38 +0000

Not too many bright spots in there, is there?

By: gerry

gerry — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:20:59 +0000

We have a congress with a cumulative IQ less that of the outside temperature. Could that be a reason?

By: Chris In Dallas

Chris In Dallas — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:42:45 +0000

Thats easy. We are dealing with hippies. 'Nuf said!

By: Things you Need to Know Before you Buy Digital Camera | Muchip.Com

Things you Need to Know Before you Buy Digital Camera | Muchip.Com — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:10:58 +0000

[...] Environmentalists Recommend Eating Your Dog Before Getting Rid of … [...]

By: Cloying_odor

Cloying_odor — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:53:25 +0000

Exactly

We have the technology to replace the current fossil fuel energy infrastructure with IFR Nuclear Reactors and Electric vehicles and completly eliminate fossil fuel pollution and oil dependence. Of course the same people who want you to stop heating your house and driving your car in order to save the planet don't want this either. Why is that? If the situation is so dire then why won't they explore an existing option that would solve many more issues than just greenhouse gas emmisions?

By: Leon LaPorte

Leon LaPorte — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:42:03 +0000

Why is it that a well documented, scientifically provable, theory – such as Global Warming – needs so much propaganda pushed down our throats. If it is so obvious and the changes are everywhere, shouldn't the average person be able to perceive it? Is it that the average person is just too dumb?

After all, the average person knows politicians are scum bags and it didn't require hours of propaganda each day on radio and TV for us to recognize it.

It's been proven the earth has warmed, and cooled, numerous times in just the last 1000 years. What's so critical in this cyclical occurrence that suddenly requires smashing economies and lifestyles? Let's say we ARE warming. Perhaps we have been living in an unnaturally cool era and the earth is returning to it's normal mean temperatures. As a kid, I recall all the scare mongering about the "Coming Ice age". Doom was imminent!

With all that said; I would like to see more power generated from solar, wind, hydro etc as long as it is fiscally and technologically reasonable to do so. If for no other reason than to get us off foreign oil. I'd like to see the sheiks drink that crap and return to their desert dwelling, sheep herder ways. The US should lead the way. I think it would stimulate the economy – which paradoxically, the Warming Alarmists always seem to be against.

By: Cloying_odor

Cloying_odor — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 18:27:48 +0000

Free education here (warning may require reading comprehension and critical thinking!) http://www.drroyspencer.com/2009/12/global-warmin...