Ride an SUB not an SUV

On Apr 14, 7:33 pm, "johnny@." johnny@. wrote:
donquijote1954 wrote:
""We don't want to pollute - but it's OK if China does - - - ""

Welcome to the Global Economy

It's not politics - - It's business

Remember supply and demand. How about we demand, and they supply. It's a new version of the NIMBY syndrome. We want (just for you) new bicycles, but don't be polluting our air to
make it for me.

You may as well may have given it the title "Welcome to the Jungle"...
which proves my point that we reject civilization in order to eat each
other --or may I say in order to compete unequally, where the unions --
American unions-- are crushed before the never tiring, never
complaining Chinese workers...

Oh, they complain, but when they do, they get crushed. By tanks!

Here the picture is different: You can complain, but they don't
listen.

"Freedom is when the people can speak, democracy is when the
government listens" -Alastair Farrugia

This may sound Quixotic, but the future is up in the air, not in the
sense the Republicans make it likely, but in the sense of windmills.
Regrettably, not enough money is going into it, since --as you may
very well know, unless you are blind-- our resources are going into
war and other stupid ways to secure a long life for the dinosaurs, ie
the SUVs...

Wind Power Set to Become World's Leading Energy Source

Lester R. Brown

In 1991, a national wind resource inventory taken by the U.S.
Department of Energy startled the world when it reported that the
three most wind-rich states-North Dakota, Kansas, and Texas-had enough
harnessable wind energy to satisfy national electricity needs. Now a
new study by a team of engineers at Stanford reports that the wind
energy potential is actually substantially greater than that estimated
in 1991.

Advances in wind turbine design since 1991 allow turbines to operate
at lower wind speeds, to harness more of the wind's energy, and to
harvest it at greater heights-dramatically expanding the harnessable
wind resource. Add to this the recent bullish assessments of offshore
wind potential, and the enormity of the wind resource becomes
apparent. Wind power can meet not only all U.S. electricity needs, but
all U.S. energy needs.

....

Denmark leads the world in the share of its electricity from wind-20
percent. In terms of sheer generating capacity, Germany leads with
12,000 megawatts. By the end of 2003, it will have already surpassed
its 2010 goal of 12,500 megawatts of generating capacity. For Germany,
this rapid growth in wind power is central to reaching its goal of
reducing carbon emissions 40 percent by 2020.

....

The energy future belongs to wind. The world energy economy became
progressively more global during the twentieth century as the world
turned to oil. It promises to reverse direction and become more local
during the twenty-first century as the world turns to wind, wind-
generated hydrogen, and solar cells. Wind and wind-generated hydrogen
will shape not only the energy sector of the global economy but the
global economy itself.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update24.htm

drydem wrote:
On Apr 14, 12:31 am, Bill wrote:
Curtis L. Russell wrote:
On 13 Apr 2007 11:27:43 -0700, "donquijote1954"
wrote:
As a matter of fact, windmills are a good solution --in some cases.
Windmills are a good supplement. In the U.S. with tax breaks and
setasides, even the oil companies are buying lots, but its a huge
investment and it doesn't add up to much as a percentage of the power
needed and in the windiest areas they aren't reliable enough to
support even a small grid on their own. Windmills are not a solution.
Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...
Has anybody looked at the current generation of high-tech (sic) windmills?
They are a joke, and bird killers to boot.
The best windmill designs were those that were in use in the 1930's when
the TVA project demanded that a farmer take down or disable his windmill
to get power to the farm. Obviously that would take enough electricity
to pay for running out the electricity so the farmer could have electric
lights. The new, 3 skinny blade windmills are a joke since 90% of the
air pass right through the gaps.
The intake vanes of a modern jet engine show how a windmill should be
designed, along with a feathering mechanism for windy days.
Too much thinking for the current crop of over-educated dimwits.
Bill Baka

The best hi tech windmills are from germany - they have
variable vane/airfoils that can adjust to the windspeed.
They are very tall structures and generate quite a bit of
power. Some environmentalist are worried that these
structures represent a danger to birds - I haven't come
across any scientific studies verifying this risk though.

The reason the blades/vanes are very thin is that this
design can structurally handle higher wind forces
and thus is more resistance to damage from high
winds. Lighter thinner blades require less wind
force to reach the minumum speed needed for
electric generation faster than if the windmill blades
were heavier and larger.

The reason the blades are thin is they LOOK hi-tech.
When I see a big wind generator all I see is inefficiency.
Most of the wind goes through the HUGE gap between the blades.
When birds try to do that most get through but some get nailed by the
next blade. I won't try to debate with you since if you don't understand
now I doubt that you ever will.
Bill Baka

The intake vanes of a turbojet are designed to
runs at a different speed and different magnitude
of force than a windmill. There are similarities
in a turbojet's intake vanes and that of a
hydro electric generator's turbine. Nuclear
power plants that use hi pressure steam also
have electric generator turbines that look
similar to a turbojet's vanes.

"Bill" wrote in message
...

I won't try to debate with you since if you don't understand now I doubt
that you ever will.
Bill Baka


Hold this up to a mirror and read it.

"di" wrote in :


"donquijote1954" wrote in message
ups.com...


"The terrorists who attacked America weren't being funded primarily
by drug money. They were being funded primarily by oil money. In
other words, it isn't the drug addicts who should feel guilty. It's
the gasoline addicts."


So where did this "oil money" come from? Before you answer, be
careful, you about to justify the Iraq War.




The people who who attacked America on 9/11 were funded by the taxes the
Americam people pay every year on April 15. They are :
Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz


Please see : http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

So, don quixote, What would it take to get you to sell
us all down the river?

Well, besides T-shirts (I don't think the store is even working), I'm
selling the idea of THE REVOLUTION. Hey, don't you think of Chavez
taking over here --or even Obama (much less Osama)--, but rather to
get America going in the path toward change and civilization, say the
Canadian DEMOCRATIC way. Yes, they have signed the Kyoto Protocol,
provide Healthcare for all and stayed away from this predatory war...

So if you want to buy the idea let me know. Absolutely free.

THE REVOLUTION
http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

On Apr 14, 3:18 pm, "george conklin" wrote:
"nash" wrote in message


Y'all need to read Hofstadter's book on the paranoid in American politics.
You are good examples.

George, Big Oil and Big Tobacco are very similar. Even when Big
Tobacco knew of the risks of smoking, they dismissed it by hiring a
good PR firm to throw confusion about the issue. Maybe you should try
to work for one, if you are not already doing so...

The big difference is that smokers mostly pollute their own lungs.
SUVs, though, are dangerous to all who inhabit this planet. A label
may just say, "This Supersized Unnecessary Vehicle is dangerous to
your health, and to those around you."

On Apr 14, 3:18 pm, "george conklin" wrote:

Y'all need to read Hofstadter's book on the paranoid in American politics.
You are good examples.

See, George, you could do a good PR. Or perhaps we should give the
"honor" to that other George that lead us into the costliest war after
WWII over nonexistent WMDs...

"I defy anyone to read the middle chapters of The Cigarette Century,
the ones that detail the foundation of the Tobacco Institute and the
industry's efforts to muddy scientific waters, and not come away with
a burning need to drive down to North Carolina and find someone to
throttle. Or Madison Avenue. Among the many villains Brandt skillfully
waterboards are executives at the public relations giant Hill &
Knowlton, which during the 1950s single-handedly orchestrated Big
Tobacco's campaign to undermine anti-smoking advocates and scientists
up to and including the surgeon general. No lie was too big to tell,
no bit of pseudo-science too ridiculous to pass off as legitimate.
Parents, if you have teenagers considering a career in p.r., have them
read this first. I can't remember the last time I read a more scathing
indictment of corporate malfeasance."

http://www.amazon.com/Cigarette-Cent.../dp/0465070477

"Chris" wrote in message
.. .
"di" wrote in :


"donquijote1954" wrote in message
ups.com...


"The terrorists who attacked America weren't being funded primarily
by drug money. They were being funded primarily by oil money. In
other words, it isn't the drug addicts who should feel guilty. It's
the gasoline addicts."


So where did this "oil money" come from? Before you answer, be
careful, you about to justify the Iraq War.




The people who who attacked America on 9/11 were funded by the taxes the
Americam people pay every year on April 15. They are :
Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz


Please see : http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm


You forgot:
Donald Duck

"Chris" wrote in message
.. .
"di" wrote in :


"donquijote1954" wrote in message
ups.com...


"The terrorists who attacked America weren't being funded primarily
by drug money. They were being funded primarily by oil money. In
other words, it isn't the drug addicts who should feel guilty. It's
the gasoline addicts."


So where did this "oil money" come from? Before you answer, be
careful, you about to justify the Iraq War.




The people who who attacked America on 9/11 were funded by the taxes the
Americam people pay every year on April 15. They are :
Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz


Please see : http://www.newamericancentury.org/st...principles.htm

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


That was a really stupid reply.