I guess one of Bush's current talking points is on finding alternative fuels. It's pretty late in the game but I'll take it. Sure, he's coming at it from a foreign dependence angle primarily, but I'll take it.
I've never understood (a lie, I think I do understand) why with our propensity for technological advancement we haven't agressively worked to find alternatives to gas and oil. And if for no other reason, I think if the Gulf War leads us away from a gas driven society, it will have been worth it (from the perspective of the greater good for the greater number, not from a standpoint of moral principles).
It's my understanding that the "ambiguous" data on global warming is quickly becoming unambiguous. Last year it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that global weather could not be explained without factoring the effect of these human "inputs." The most recent study of layers of quickly melting ice in Greenland indicates that the current activities are not simply part of the regular ebb and flow of global temperature.
This is not an issue for partisan politics. This is an "if there's even a possibility, prepare" one.
So kudoes to Bush. I'm all for nuclear power (so don't take me to be some liberal parrot). But I'm also for hybrids and stricter emission laws and Kyoto treaties (even if the other nations are hypocrites--that doesn't keep us from being better than they are).
If I'm wrong, you can make fun of me and the world will still be a better place for it.
If you're wrong, sell your apartment in Manhattan because it will be under water in 25 years.
That's why I've been buying up property in Western Nevada.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I will give Bush major props for his push (financially and politically) for alternative means of energy.
However, while talking about our dependency on oil and our dangerous relationship with a depleting energy source (I am currently reading up on the oil reserve situation), our government is still giving huge tax cuts to small business owners for buying large suv's (the ones over three tons...like hummers and excursions!) They give tax cuts to hybrid car buyers too, but not close to the same amount for the gas guzzlers.
This leaves me puzzled
Rising water levels could compound the situation, but I'm more concerned with what land / region will be productive and usefull in a post-oil age? I see that as more important.
Then again, I'm from the MidWest. ("I ain't afraid of no coast".)
I like your perspective on energy... let's talk sometime. I've been bouncing things off of Dennis Brinkman in the Chemistry dept. for awhile. If you want to know more, ask him!
Personally, I've always had an eccentric fondness for hydrogen peroxide. I guess it was this Saturday morning TV show where this 21st century guy had a jet pack that ran on it. The Smithsonian has a prototype for an infantry model that was never used. Too loud? :)
Have you ever seen Rocketman?
Yes, but I can't remember what he used for fuel.
Just for the record, I was not primarily thinking of nations like England, Scotland (insert English joke that wouldn't come off well), or Germany. I was actually thinking more third world.
(My position on your post is implied in the following… “let the reader understand.”)
“Bush should stay out of manipulating the markets. God gave us the earth to use not to worship and preserve. The earth is not a talent to be hidden in the ground—that will bring condemnation from the Master. The earth is not sacred--that's New Age piffle—it is ours to use. God expects us to subdue the earth and use it—not preserve it as if it were some sort of zoo. God put oil here so aggressive creative people can go get it and use it up to make our lives better. He put trees here so we can make houses and burn them for warmth. Bush should not mess with the natural order of things—especially the natural order of the economy. We will find alternative sources of energy when the supply of oil shrinks enough to increase the demand and thus raise prices so that burning corn-created alcohol, (or hydrogen peroxide!) will be competitive--until then we should let the market rule, and Bush and everybody else should stay out of it. God gave us natural resources for our benefit—we can use them up at any rate we want to. Jesus did not die for trees but men and women—there is nothing sacred about oil, or dirt, or trees, or Buffalos. These are consumables. So we ought to take all the oil we want to, and use it any way we want--its ours and a gift of God. God gave these things to us to enable us to live a more comfortable and happy life. He gave us animals and grains to eat; trees to build houses from, oil to run our engines on, rivers to swish away pollutants we wouldn’t want to leave around locally... God designed the earth to produce fruit for us to consume—he does not expect us to stand beside and watch the fruit rot. Man was not made for the earth; the earth was made for man. After all, what sort of God would make a tree with fruit and not let us eat from it?”
I'm going to say that either Keith really has outlandish ideas or he doesn't realize that copying and pasting from Dick Cheney's blog might be copyright infringement.
haha Kevin!
Darn you Drury, stop trying to get us riled up, it's not going to work this time.
By the way, not only did God give us stuff to use and abuse, but He also has preordained the consequences of greed, economic desparity, and civil war after we use them all up. What a great God!
Nice try Drury
Coach:
Where did you get that silly quote?
No one who's read three of your words would believe you wrote that.
Post a Comment