He has plenty of other things to build a "status". This is a reaction of the incoming administration chomping at the bit to raze the landscape for their own gain. A reaction I support 100%.
-
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!
Obama creates two nature preserves
- Thread starter Quetzal
- Start date
It's the only chance they have to do something important or valuable without creating a crippling political backlash.
The latter.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I didn't mean them as resources that we should use up but, instead, resources that we can cherish for their natural beauty.
BTW, isn't it weird that the first president to create a national park was Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, and now what we see all too often are Republicans who just want to sell them off or "drill baby drill" so $ can be made. Teddy's gotta be rolling over in his grave.
tytlyf
Not Religious
Why would you need to ask that question? It's common sense. The sun
esmith
Veteran Member
So your going to replace all fossil fuels with solar power, when will this be available, and where are you going to put all the generating equipment? That's why I'm asking the question, but I'm fairly positive you do not have a viable answer. Just we will do it. Where are you going to get the replacement for all the products that require petroleum in the production?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Even though they're a lot smaller than us here in the States, Denmark is going to be off the use of fossil fuels within the next decade. Here in this country, we have actually already reduced oil and coal consumption, and we're still early in the "green revolution".
As you well know, it makes so much more sense to get off fossil fuels for a variety of reasons, which at least you well understand.
tytlyf
Not Religious
Good question, either way, you will run out of oil. Whether it be in 1000 years or 1 million years. If products require petroleum and petroleum is a necessary ingredient, then it would make sense to save that petroleum for those products and cease using oil for things that don't require oil (cars, engines, etc).
All you're doing now is making the world a much worse place for future generations. Your children and grandchildren will have a very daunting future. For instance, conservatives are OK with national monuments not being protected so their children and grandchildren could one day witness them. They actually believe it's that evil American government doing another 'land grab.' Just falls back to the usual excuse, slippery slope argument.
tytlyf
Not Religious
I was in Iceland back in Sept. Whole country is run by geo-thermal. Clean, natural energy. Sure you see pipelines in a lot of places and steam plumes, but it's worth it. Those eye sores can be sorted out later. And who doesn't love jacuzzi's everywhere?
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I have a couple of friends who were there two years ago and another who are going there this upcoming summer. I would love to have gone there, but ...
tytlyf
Not Religious
Most beautiful land I've ever seen. Can't think of anything close. Don't get me started about the women. Just wish everything wasn't double the price there. But it's worth it.I have a couple of friends who were there two years ago and another who are going there this upcoming summer. I would love to have gone there, but ...
esmith
Veteran Member
Still haven't answered the question. "So your going to replace all fossil fuels with solar power, when will this be available, and where are you going to put all the generating equipment?" No answer I suspect
tytlyf
Not Religious
? You'll have to find something to replace fossil fuels eventually, better get the ball rolling sooner than later. We have plenty of solar farms in America. The equipment is built on land.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Hey, I've been in Scandinavia, so you don't have to tell me much about the women. My ancestry is part Swedish, and oh I could leave and live there in a minute!
BTW, Sweden is quite expensive as well, but what a beautiful country. Instead, I have settled for our place in da U.P., and we got lots of Scandinavians near us there, let me tell ya! Even my wife, who's from Italy, just absolutely loves it.
Renewable energy is coming. Period. On what time frame is a question I can't answer. See, I try to think of the big picture. Unlike yourself who would rather drill and die before having to deal with the consequences my generation will have to fix.
Are you aware that we US taxpayers contribute BILLIONS of dollars in subsidies to profitable oil companies? We should have been diverting some or all of those subsidies to alternative energy research decades ago, but given that it's almost 2017, we should start right now, reallocating oil subsidies to alternative fuel R&D. For example: wind, solar, fusion, algae, tidal, and so on.
esmith
Veteran Member
Well to start with we always here this when it comes to wind turbines...."Not in my backyard"
In addition an excellent paper on the subject by Robert Lyman entitled "Why Renewable Energy Cannot Replace Fossil Fuels by 2050" (Note: it is a PDF file and has to be downloaded, search for the title of the paper).
It has some very good points and might shed some light on renewable energy issues that might open your eyes. Then again maybe not.
I skimmed the paper. Given a number of assumptions, I think he makes sense. But I have to question some of the assumptions:
- let's say we can't entirely replace oil by 2050, so what? Shouldn't we do what we can in the meantime anyway?
- I've seen various projections about making fusion a reality, and in all of those, more R&D speeds up the process.
- we can also reduce energy usage. i just heard a talk about - more or less - allowing only golf-cart-style autos within urban areas.
- permaculturalists have demonstrate substantial farm efficiency improvements over "big ag", which is not surprising given how the profit motive even worms its way into feeding people.
I guess the summary is that the solution will be a combination of incremental improvements, and we should divert any, many more funds to R&D.
esmith
Veteran Member
And what technical knowledge do you have to question what the paper said? Or are you questioning it based on you don't like what was put forward?