Congressional inaction

  • Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.

    We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.

    We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
Status
Not open for further replies.
The R's turned this thing down a number of times before the drilling even entered the picture. The drilling is the newest kink. The main problem, all along, is that the R's did not want to PAY for the bill. They may have passed it, but just dug us further into debt for the payment.

A post here is way too short to go over each and every time this bill came up, along with all the nuances. I expect our readers can do that for themselves. The fact remains that it could have been passed a NUMBER of times with no problem.....whether it contained drilling offshore, ANWAR or not - because it does not disallow those things...they are be separate battles....some involving states rights, etc.

The point is, if this bill is mostly good, pass it and then start on the next things. To hold it up for months and years because of something they thought of LONG after the bill was crafted (offshore drilling) is just holding us hostage. We need a LOT of legislation and plans and it has to start somewhere....in the meanwhile, we get nowhere (and in the case of solar and wind tax credits, we go backwards)....

But, then again, I suspect many people already know that.

As far as building nukes and decomissioning them later, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but stupid planning got us here, and building things that are not going to pay off (or even MIGHT not pay off) is more of the same. So if you like where we are now and want to go further down the same road.....build nukes and drill more! Worked perfect last time.
 
For those actually following the votes from the "do nothing" congress, here is one that missed by ONE VOTE.

http://tinyurl.com/66ogp9

Notice that got 59 votes in the Senate, which means a few GOP'ers joined their Dem friends to attempt a veto-proof majority....because Bush doesn't want this stuff....you have to get over him by having 60 votes.

OK, so there was 59 votes FOR and 40 Against........BUT, there are 100 Senators.........what happened to the last vote?

I see, one Senator was missing from the roll call. John McCain. Obviously his vote was NO, since his absence caused it to fail.

I don't see the "do nothing" congress - I see one trying to pass some good bills, which the Presidents wants to veto...
 
Dunebilly said:
Not to be disagreeable but what do you mean by a viable storage medium? Are you saying there are no viable batterys for electric cars? Electric cars are exremely viable today, and are getting better all the time. Electric cars and trucks is the most important component in any plan to burn less oil. The average american drives 30 miles a day, and even a cheesy converted electric car with old fashioned lead acid batteries will go 50 miles. Modern lithium ion batteries will go 200 miles on a single charge.
Click to expand...
This I think address some of the storage issues. http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/oxygen-0731.html
 
The problem is that fuel got cheap and we got complacent. Whether we would do so again or not, I don't know, but I do know that we've gotta have that juice. I think that the difference this time, if we drill more and build nukes, is that eco-friendly is more mainstream than the last time we had energy issues, in the 70s. Back then tree huggers were restricted to stinking hippies whining at the man, this time those stinking hippies are showered up, clean cut; the tree-huggers ARE the man. I think now we would be smart enough to use more drilling and more nukes as a means to an end, instead of an end unto itself as it was leaving the 70s. We all know that our ways need to change. Even if gasoline went back to a buck a gallon, I won't be going back to my gearhead ways of bigger is better. Instead I'm going to try going electric and make a viable performance vehicle that way.
 
Webmaster said:
The R's turned this thing down a number of times before the drilling even entered the picture. The drilling is the newest kink. The main problem, all along, is that the R's did not want to PAY for the bill. They may have passed it, but just dug us further into debt for the payment.
Click to expand...

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/anwr-drilling-supporters-lose-senate/story.aspx?guid={BEB9B292-BA87-4CE1-972F-169C02C15736}

Senate blocked ANWR vote in 2002. So I think you have your timing backwards.
 
Telco said:
The R's said they'd go with the renewable if more drilling is allowed, so it's in the D's court. IF they put it in, then they can get the renewable act passed. No problem.

So far as nuke fuel, Carter signed an order saying the US won't be involved in fuel reprocessing. End result: 30 years of no progress, and a buildup of nuclear waste. Fuel reprocessing would have solved some of the problem with storing nuke waste. So, end the ban on reprocessing, and let's start building those breeder reactors. With them, we can stop using petroleum for non-motive uses like we do now. Picture the usage of petroleum if the entire northeast were no longer burning fuel oil to heat their homes. That's 23 percent of the current use of petroleum in the US. If natural gas were no longer used in the home, and all houses were heated with electricity instead, that natural gas could be used for this hydrogen economy or for other motive fuel uses.

And I'm not saying go nuke and call it a done deal. That BMW plant discussed in another thread is an outstanding way of doing things too. We need more juice in the daytime at night anyway, at least until the plugin car really takes off, so this would help build the bridge to the future.

The biggest problem I see is nobody wants to implement an imperfect solution. As Soviet Admiral Sergei Georgievich Gorshkov said, "Perfect is the enemy of good enough." The problem with energy is nobody wants to do anything new unless it emits no pollution, is completely invisible and provides all power for all needs, right off the bat, and will fulfill all our needs forever and ever. We have nothing like this now. So we need to go with the imperfect solutions that are good enough RIGHT NOW, while striving for better. When we have better, implement it then. We all know that barring some technological leap that electricity is the way it's going to be, so implementing any and all solutions that move as much to electrical power as possible, is the way to go right now. Build those nukes, build those hydro dams, build those solar installations. Get 'em up. We can always decommission them later, and in the meantime we can lift the reprocessing ban and work on ALL ways of getting rid of the waste.
Click to expand...

Have a link for describing fuel reprocessing? I'd like to read up on it.

The last half of your post is superb. Never thought of it that way, but that truly is the problem. Excellent post Telco.
 
Telco said:
We all know that our ways need to change.
Click to expand...

So, all of a sudden hundreds of millions of people in the USA "get it"?.......

Not true...in any way, shape of form. Maybe you get it, maybe I get it, maybe some others get it - but MOST people do not get it and will put off any change for as long as possible, even if it means mortgaging their own and others future.

I guess this is like WWI, where they said there would never be another World War because everyone "got it"....sorry, they did not - and still do not.

It seems like one of our basic human failings is the inability to understand that everyone else does not see the world though the same eyes as each of us do.
 
And a house
And a couple TV's
and all appliances
and a boat
and a horse and trailer for it
and a pickup truck
and to fly places - cheap
and good road
and air conditioning
and computers
and in-store microwave ovens, custom kitchen deliveries........

(note: I'm still short the horse and boat).
 
TurboZ said:
Pelosi closed congress for "vacation" because she didnt want a vote on drilling:)

I agree we should get 100% write off on any energy upgrade for our homes. Insualtion, heating systems etc should be on the table.

Also nukes sound good to me, along with new refineries, offshore rigs etc.


time for multi-tasked approach instead of politics as usual.
Click to expand...

The bozo's in congress might not be working......but the boys at Cianbro Corp. in Maine is....

Motiva hired Pittsfield-based Cianbro Corp. to build 53 refinery modules for the Motiva Port Arthur Refinery, which is in the middle of a $7 billion expansion that will make the Texas facility the largest crude oil processing plant in North America.

http://www.brewerme.org/Cianbro/cianbro_eastern_manufacturing_workers.htm

someone has to take the bull by the horns whether its oil, solar,nukes, etc. or al of the above and it appears that Congress does NOT want to even touch this issue. Hats off to Cianbro and other Corp. that are forging forward for the good of jobs and the people. God knows the clowns in Washington arent. :)
 
Dunebilly said:
Not to be disagreeable but what do you mean by a viable storage medium? Are you saying there are no viable batterys for electric cars? Electric cars are exremely viable today, and are getting better all the time. Electric cars and trucks is the most important component in any plan to burn less oil. The average american drives 30 miles a day, and even a cheesy converted electric car with old fashioned lead acid batteries will go 50 miles. Modern lithium ion batteries will go 200 miles on a single charge.
Click to expand...

Heard on the radio today that some group...not sure which rights group......they are being vocal about electric cars being a hazard to the visually impaired(I put hearing accidently,oops, sorry lol) because they make no noise. So they want to possibly have them making "some" kind of noise lol. I have an idea....put spoked rims on them and use a clothespin and baseball card.....lol.
 
Webmaster said:
And a house
And a couple TV's
and all appliances
and a boat
and a horse and trailer for it
and a pickup truck
and to fly places - cheap
and good road
and air conditioning
and computers
and in-store microwave ovens, custom kitchen deliveries........

(note: I'm still short the horse and boat).
Click to expand...

you must be in that 1% Craig....lol :)
 
mbcijim - just do a search on nuclear fuel reprocessing, and it'll pull up links describing the process with detachment, US policy, and in pro and con terms.

Webmaster - Getting it and doing something about it are two different things.

I can do without the horse and trailer, cheap flying, and to be perfectly honest I could do without the computers.
 
Approaching 50 and i have never flown....eeeek....I must not be in the "in crowd" lol.
 
I would like to mention my opinion in regards to the pro-nuclear crowd. I honestly believe that if all other options are pursued to the fullest extent, that more nuclear plants would not be nessasary. By other options, I am refering to wind, all types of solar,tidal, hydroelectric, trap grease refinement, algae, etc. The town sewer in Barnstable Mass for example, seperates over 3000 gallons of trap grease per day, which could be readily gassified or converted to a diesel equivelent fuel. While it is true that the sun doen't always shine, and the wind doesn't always blow, the tide always flows. The bay of Fundy alone produces enough horsepower to power the eastern half of the entire continent of America.
 
Dunebilly said:
I would like to mention my opinion in regards to the pro-nuclear crowd. I honestly believe that if all other options are pursued to the fullest extent, that more nuclear plants would not be nessasary. By other options, I am refering to wind, all types of solar,tidal, hydroelectric, trap grease refinement, algae, etc. The town sewer in Barnstable Mass for example, seperates over 3000 gallons of trap grease per day, which could be readily gassified or converted to a diesel equivelent fuel. While it is true that the sun doen't always shine, and the wind doesn't always blow, the tide always flows. The bay of Fundy alone produces enough horsepower to power the eastern half of the entire continent of America.
Click to expand...

And they probably pay a tidy sum to have that grease hauled off to be 'disposed of'. If they were smart, it would be used to heat the schools and run the school buses.
 
Dunebilly said:
I would like to mention my opinion in regards to the pro-nuclear crowd. I honestly believe that if all other options are pursued to the fullest extent, that more nuclear plants would not be nessasary. By other options, I am refering to wind, all types of solar,tidal, hydroelectric, trap grease refinement, algae, etc. The town sewer in Barnstable Mass for example, seperates over 3000 gallons of trap grease per day, which could be readily gassified or converted to a diesel equivelent fuel. While it is true that the sun doen't always shine, and the wind doesn't always blow, the tide always flows. The bay of Fundy alone produces enough horsepower to power the eastern half of the entire continent of America.
Click to expand...


Sounds like a profitable business for you dunebilly, bring your diesel rig down for that low odor grease from the sewer system;)

How can you make these blanket statements, like could easliy be, should be etc Stop drinking the kool aid. Most of these cant be scaled up at an economical cost. Look at people here whining about their 70$ a month electric bill. If the utilities went and added all these things willy nilly and the PUC double or triple their rates they would be screaming.

In Maine you can opt to buy "green" power at a higher rate but most people dont. Bottom line is the bottom line and people want lowest cost reliable power.
 
Sorry, I thought that when I said "in my opinion", it would be clear that I was expressing my opinion. I was under the impression that I was still entitled to express my opinoin. Now lets adress your comments. Actualy, the profitable part of trap grease for me is consulting for the PRIVATELY held company which is building the plant to produce diesel fuel. The plant we are designing is for a different town, and will process 10,000 gallons per day of raw product. Want to talk about blanket statements, how about yours, "most of these can't be scaled up", Says who? No really, what exactly are you basing that on? Certainly not the tidal generators being installed all over the world even as we speak. And not on the thousands of windmills already producing power or the thousands more being built, or the prototype being erected in the bay of Fundy(close to home for you) or the reseach being done on algae oil, or any fact that I can think of at all. Can you think of any facts that back up your statement?
 
I'm not just pro-nuclear here, I'm all for using cleaner energy sources too. One I'd like to see implemented is the plasma converter to generate electricity. This is a neat little gadget that would solve three problems at once, the need for electricity, the need for motive fuel (ethanol for one) and the need for landfills. And no, it won't solve all three completely, just put a dent into electrical and motive fuel needs. It will eliminate the need for landfills though, as we'd just need a staging area for trash to go pending the burn.

A plasma converter uses an electrical arc to turn any trash into glass, and produces more electricity than it takes to generate the arc. Once the arc is generated, as long as it has trash feeding the machine it makes enough electricity to power itself and sell power to the local grid. They are expecting to be able to generate 160MW of electricity from trash, while consuming 40MW of that power to keep the machine running.

What's really nice about it is, the machine can accept anything man throws out, except nuclear waste. Course, you never know, more research along these lines might actually turn up a way to dispose of nuke fuel with one of these machines. And that anything includes just that, anything. It can burn dirty diapers, chembio weapons, shotgun shells, mobsters, tires, used motor oil, Fluffy, paint, anything. Yet another neat thing about this is, it also generates syngas that can be converted into liquid fuels including ethanol. Amazing machine, lots of pluses with no apparent minuses to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

webfish
  • Locked
General GLOSSARY OF COMMON HEARTH AND HEATING TERMS
Replies
0
Views
7K
Articles
webfish
webfish
webfish
  • Locked
General SHOULD OPEN FIREPLACES BE ILLEGAL
Replies
0
Views
10K
Articles
webfish
webfish
Top Bottom
Back