IntenseDebate - JJS PEng

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 0 replies · +1 points

...which is probably the simplest and most logical explanation for spending $300 million on a "tiny, tiny minority". I don't closely follow American politics, but I'm willing to bet that Al Gore was (is) a gifted pork barreler.

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 2 replies · +1 points

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I got to thinking about Gore's $300 million campaign to convince (in Al Gore's own words) "...a tiny, tiny minority..." that Global Warming/Climate Change is a real threat to the world. If the number of "deniers" are so small, then wouldn't it be more pragmatic to just ignore them and continue collecting carbon credits (say that 3 times fast!)? Or is it that the "alarmists" are in panic mode? Here's a great article by Phillip Stott on the subject: http://web.mac.com/sinfonia1/iWeb/Global%20Warmin...

Maybe Al's $300 million would be better spent here: http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm?aid=837...

I think Ecuador has something here. Let's promise to never drill in Alaska if Greenpeace and other environmentalists give the Alaskan government $1 billion. If the Sierra Club gives Alberta $500 million, we promise to never build any more coal power plants. How about $250 million to Romania to never re-open the gold mine in Rosia Montana (see Mine Your Own Business).

Like the old adage says: Are you (environmentalists) willing to put your money where your mouth is?

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Edward Markey and Big ... · 0 replies · +1 points

The media have about 2 minutes max. to air a story in a typical 30 minute newscast (CNN and MSNBC are exceptions). Is this an excuse for laziness? No, but apparently it makes a good crutch. Shoddy and sensationalist journalism (see Dan Rather) is a big reason I no longer watch the news on TV.

Here's to the decline of the MSM (raises a Canadian beer).

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Edward Markey and Big ... · 2 replies · +1 points

Ah, this is all show. Here in Canada, we've had several federal inquiries into the potential "collusion" of oil companies regarding gas prices, and each time - surprise, surprise - they found no evidence for said collusion. It's just an opportunity for politicians to get free air time.

I wonder how much it would surprise people that gasoline only comprises a small percentage of oil company profits. I don't have the numbers on me, but I'd bet that asphalt, PVCs, and vinyls are much more profitable that gasoline is.

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 0 replies · +1 points

Here are a couple of websites to back me up (and if you don't believe the 300 head of bison just because it's on a Syncrude site, fly up to Ft. Mac and look for yourself):

http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=n03191...

http://www.syncrude.ca/users/folder.asp?FolderID=...

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 5 replies · +2 points

What about Syncrude's efforts to reclaim oil sands land no longer in use north of Fort McMurray, AB. I worked in "Ft. Mac" and have seen the reclamation work myself, which includes a park for bison herds (over 100 head).

And before you mention the pollution of the Athabasca River, I should point out that the oil sands actually oozes out of the hillsides and into the river. I wonder if anyone thought of looking into that.

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 4 replies · +2 points

So eliminate one subsidy and create another is your answer? Why not just eliminate all subsidies and let the most competitive win?

I don't know about subsidies for big oil (probably for exploration), but I do know that "big oil" is taxed heavily. Just look at Alberta where royalties (i.e. taxes) are going increase even more, which probably means a slowdown in oil production.

As for the rest of your comment, you're assuming we've reached "peak oil" production, a 30+ year old and tired argument. Sorry if I don't buy it. There are probably more reservoirs in areas under bureaucratic/government protection (i.e. Gulf of Mexico and coast of Washington St. and British Columbia)

16 years ago @ Copious Dissent - Your... - Leslie Stahl: Worst Jo... · 6 replies · +2 points

arevolutionofone, the problems with getting alternative fuels mass marketed are as follows:

1. Supply: it is more difficult and costly to produce 1 litre/gallon of ethanol and hydrogen as opposed to 1 litre/gallon of gasoline. In fact, it take more than 1 unit of gas to produce 1 unit of ethanol. Maybe technology will solve this one day, but today is not that day.

2. Infrastructure: take hydrogen for example. There needs to be a large amount of re-fueling stations since hydrogen cars have lower mileages than gas-combustion cars, and currently there is not the demand for hydrogen cars to rationlise building hydrogen re-fueling stations (Sorry Arnie, no hydrogen highway for you).

In short, it's not "big oil" keeping alternative fuels off the market, it's that oil is economical and the others are not.

In my opinion, it is better to improve fuel effeciency and non-CO2 emissions for gas-combustion cars. However, can then run into Jevons paradox, but that's another thread. ;)

IntenseDebate Comment System

Description

Connect with JJS PEng

People I'm following

JJS PEng