Under Obama (through the EPA), we're about to find out how bad and how
expensive life can be when coal that is used to fire electric power plants is
restricted. Sadly, many people have no clue how much coal and oil (petroleum
based products) add to our lives in a positive way. We're about to find
out.Doubt me?Consider the words of our Dear Leader:"You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you
know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would
NECESSARILY SKYROCKET. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good
or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know,
natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry
was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money.
They will pass that money on to consumers (emphasis mine)." -Barack
ObamaBTW, this is why Obama and other leftists must, at all costs,
push the myth of AGW.
"Saudi Arabia and some other countries are contributing to those wishing to
obstruct drilling and fracking."Some citation please?"We have enough oil and gas for a hundred years or more." (Citation
needed) Does this include the guestimates on oil shale?"Don't you think in a decade or so we can have nuclear fusion or
other sources of energy."Magically appearing, because we
haven't seriously tried anything new since nuke power in 1954?Little
tweeks to existing technology but no real leaps. Meanwhile the need for more
power for every facet of our lives is rising exponentially every year.Time to stop digging for our energy.
I did not know conservatives hated Uncle Ben. we have enough oil and gas for a
hundred years or more. Don't you think in a decade or so we can have
nuclear fusion or other sources of energy. Don't get too excited. Utah
could handle an energy boom and in fact it is. The energy situation is why the
US is not doing worse under Obama. Saudi Arabia and some other countries are
contributing to those wishing to obstruct drilling and fracking.
I personally prefer jobs that don't pollute the waterways, the airways, the
ecosystems and on and on. It can be done. It must be done.
If all this land is taken from the feds it will be given straight away to the
energy companies. They will then destroy and pollute it. And then they will
thank us and run. The feds will then have to pick up the clean-up tab so you
don't die just to live here.I prefer the status quo.
People keep getting in the way of oil drilling. Darn people!I wish
that we could just drill everywhere at anytime! Poor billionaire oil
@2 bitCottonwood Heights, UTOpen Minded RE:
"[bus=6mpg -- so 330 passenger miles/gallon]"...======== I see we don't have a Math 101 student --- 330
passenger miles / 6 mpg = 55 passengers per bus.Math -- F-BTW -- I'm not "against" fossil fuels, I'm an
Engineer -- And God has given us knowledge to do better than we are doing
now.Remember, We can not be saved in ignorance.
There are fathers, good men, who have jobs to support their families because of
the oil. IF there are bad apple dudes committing crimes, we have laws to address
that. We just need enforcement, an executive branch duty. I am sure
when the Middle East Countries own and run and rule the world with the money
they get from oil, things will be so much better. (Sarcastic) I can't wait
for sharia law.
Open Minded RE: "[bus=6mpg -- so 330 passenger
miles/gallon]"...So you fit 330 passengers on a bus? Not the
ones that run around my neighborhood. They are mostly empty, and you
couldn't fit 330 people on them even if it was free and all the pasengers
were pygmys.===But you totally missed the point. The
point isn't that mass transit is ineficient. The point is... we need
fossil fuels to run every one of these options. Fossil fuels we either have to
buy from some Saudi prince (who supports Alqaeda)... or the ones that give jobs
to Americans like you and me.Why are you so against it giving jobs
to Americans and keeping those $$$ in the US Economy?Why do you
support sending those $$$ to Arabs that may use them to fund terrorist
attacks?Seems like your political talking-points are getting in the
way of common sense on this one.
2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UTOpen Minded,How many gallons of
deisel does it take to run FrontRunner for a day?[it carries 20,000
passengers per day = 468 passengers miles/gallon]How many tons of
coal to power the Trax Trains for day?[I could look it up, but even better
than front runner]How much gas for all the busses UTA runs each
day?[bus=6mpg -- so 330 passenger miles/gallon]1 truck/SUV[11-12 passenger miles/gallon]You do the math.
Open Minded,How many gallons of deisel does it take to run FrontRunner for
a day?How many tons of coal to power the Trax Trains for day?How much gas for all the busses UTA runs each day?Don't
think we need energy develpment... try doing that without any domestic coal or
oil production (and OPEC setting the prices).We still need that
energy (Domestic or foriegn).===A liberal quoting "A
penny saved, is a penny earned" as if Conservatives don't understand it
or believe Ben Franklin... that's rich.Democrats spend
trillions pennies every minute in Washington. Tell your "A penny saved, is
a penny earned" to Democrats who are never happy unless our Federal Budget
increases by trillions of dollars each year.I think both sides have
a hard time understanding Franklin's qoute on frugality (not just one side.
The one side you say doesn't understand him).
55 gallons of gas = (1) SUV truck @ 600 miles.55 gallons of gaa = (4)
Toyota @ 600 miles, or (1) @ 2,400 miles. A penny saved, is a penny
earned.That Benjamin Franklin was a genius!Too bad
conservatives don't believe him.
Some people will always find the gray lining in every silver cloud. This thread
is a perfect example.===And the assumptions... Who is
actually thinking "we must consume all resources as rapidly as
possible"? Gotta love it when people put rediculus things nobody ever said
into their opposition's mouth.===I'm not
against developing our domestic energy resources now. I used to support using
foriegn energy resources and saving as much of ours for emergencies and the
future as possible. But times have changed. So my opinion has changed. I
still believe we should conserve as much as possible (on energy usage, also on
government and personal spending). But now that foriegn energy sources are
dwindling and the people controling them are funding terrorism with our $$$... I
changed my mind. Now I think we should develop domestic resources we have
been sitting on for generations. Not all of them, nor do I think we should use
them as fast as we can... But we should start looking into them and developing
the technologies we will need to use them... in case we need them.OPEC can crush the American economy any time... we need to get away from that.
Prosperity would be relative when the negatives outweigh the positives for most
of humanity.One of the great things about being human is those few people
who may get rich off this can go find other things to do that are less
destructive.I've never understood the thought that we must consume it
as rapidly as possible. What of future generations?
A true thinking person knows that prosperity always comes at a price, even if
the price is simply gaining a new skill set. This includes the price paid to
explore for and extract oil and natural gas. After all, tap water that can be
burned doesn't happen by itself.
Yes, let's look at all the jobs it will create?construction,
excuvation, truck drivers,welders, oil rig workers,hotels, lawyers, and fast food drive ups. No to
mention the:bars, prostitutes, drug dealers and others
cashing in on the deal.
Most successful wealth building strategies depend on privatizing profits and
socializing costs. This letter provides excellent examples of the sorts of costs
the energy industry is so good at socializing.
Conservative love Benjamin Franklin,who once said:"A penny
saved, is a penny earned."This applies to EVERYTHING, even
oil.Which then begs this:What DO conservatives conserve
anyway?, and why do they hate Benjamin Franklin?
An extractive economy is environmentally dirty. It creates boom-n-bust jobs for
low-skilled workers. It leaves devastated towns and landscapes in its wake.
North Dakota is booming now, but when the boom is over? What then? I prefer a
Utah with a clean, high-tech economy and unique, unspoiled landscapes that draw
a booming and sustainable tourist industry. Utah, do you really want your
children's future to be all about digging for coal and oil?
Wow, I can't believe people are arguing against prosperity!
Petrochemical extraction has a price, no matter where it occurs. Social,
environmental, you name it. We need to learn this; I see it all the time. It can
also bring tremendous benefits. I see that, too. One thing, however, is sure.
We're not doing anything to wean ourselves from it. So, we've made the
deal, and we're sticking with it. We want the oil, abundant and cheap as
possible. For better or for worse, we're going to have to accept what it
takes to get it.
I've also read that police are literally overwhelmed in these oil boomtowns
where the influx of male workers, with nothing to do at night, venture toward
booze, gambling, crime, and rape.
Agreed.And we all know how 30 million global visitors flock to
scenic North Dakota to enjoy the panaramic views of nature.Do we
want people to come here to take tar sand, or pictures?