Audie
Veteran Member
you know what i meant
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Democrats will not take money from fossil fuels.
- Thread starter fantome profane
- Start date
you know what i meant
Audie
Veteran Member
Soon as you come up with a battery that can
rival jet fuel, go for it.
That is sci fi.
Value equal to your mistaken assumptions about me.
Flame
Beware
Then clarify next time.
And yes, sun and wind powered jets will be a thing in time; it wasn't all that long ago where flying at all was laughed and mocked at.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
The problem with electric planes are cargo capacity and the ability to fly meaningful distances. Batteries have a much lower energy density than fossil fuels. Unless there is a revolutionary change in battery technology you will never see battery powered jet airliners. Weight is a very very important consideration when it comes to flight. That is why there are no atomic airplanes. The atom has a very high energy density, but the plants needed to harvest that energy are massive.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Possibly. Though not with our current technology. And perhaps never. There are problems that cannot be solved with engineering.
Flame
Beware
We should keep examining these and other possible ideas, sitting idle about it isn't good.
Shad
Veteran Member
Natural gas too. It's growth is very predictable and has seen investment as companies diversified into other energy products outside of oil for years.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Of course. But one can't rely on that which does not exist.
Audie
Veteran Member
I dont believe you are so dim that you actually needed clarification,
or think solar powered aircraft will ever be used.
Last edited:
tytlyf
Not Religious
Fine, keep your airplanes running on gas. So is climate change a hoax?
tytlyf
Not Religious
There you are....Those are political contributions. We can talk about lobbying (buying up congress to write corporate laws). That's a little different.
It's easy to tell which people in government are bought by Big Oil, they deny climate change. Oh, you'll see the same bunch hanging out every year with the Koch Brothers at a private resort in CA for a couple days. Gotta teach them what to say and what laws the corporations want.
"Regulations stifle growth and hurt jobs!!!!!!" *snicker*
Audie
Veteran Member
Are you?
tytlyf
Not Religious
I've noticed you don't answer the climate question. It's not that long of a sentence.
Audie
Veteran Member
Observant of you, but only by one half.
You saw my reference to your mistaken
assumptions? Plural. All of them. Mistake.
You want it in French, or Cantonese?
For some reason you keep trying to fit me into
some framework you dreamed up.
Excuse me while I dont indulge your silly game.
I want people to understand that this is not necessarily about being anti-oil or even anti-oil companies. But it is about saying that oil companies should not be dictating national policy. And with the huge contributions (bribes) to politicians that is in essence what has been happening.
Audie
Veteran Member
That is fine but they are hardly the only players, this is about posturing,
not actual funding / lobby / influence peddling reform.
I don’t think so.
Many of the anthropomorphic climate change skeptics (not “deniers”) have no connection whatsoever to fossil fuel interests. On the other hand the connections between anthropomorphic climate change advocates, or worse climate change alarmists, and vested interests in government that exploit climate change irrational fear are stronger. They exploit those irrational fears to grow government.
tytlyf
Not Religious
Yep, a RW shill. Your problem is that the conspiracy theory you keep pushing is a RW talking point. Not factual basis.
Care to try again?