|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Never mind....... /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1533912697 Message started by raydawg on 08/10/18 at 07:51:37 |
|
Title: Never mind....... Post by raydawg on 08/10/18 at 07:51:37 Back as you were...... An activist group is selling merchandise inspired by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). Color of Change, which claims to be the largest online racial justice organization in the United States, recently launched the #BeLikeMaxine campaign with the slogan “civility won’t save us.” We should all be like #MaxineWaters, because civility won't save us. Take her fighting spirit wherever you go. Shop #BeLikeMaxine: http://bit.ly/ShopBeLikeMaxine … Limited edition tote bags, buttons and a T-shirt are available for sale at the Color of Change Facebook page. So, in effect, its war.......gotcha. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by Eegore on 08/10/18 at 08:07:03 I think its more commerce than war in this case. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by raydawg on 08/10/18 at 08:55:23 7757555D4057320 wrote:
Which is even worse, if you think about it.... It’s not about repair, but profit. Stop for a moment and consider the effects of campaigns. Is the dialogue offered that which presents solutions, or more divide? Does it join together, or separate, with the spoils going to the profiting media? |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by faffi on 08/10/18 at 13:48:41 Isn't profit what America is founded on? |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/10/18 at 14:04:53 31223A27223424430 wrote:
In your mind maybe. But this liberal is no fan of maxine... |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by raydawg on 08/10/18 at 15:01:27 606760606F060 wrote:
Nope..... It makes a great sound bite, but really won’t feed a flea. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/11/18 at 17:17:05 Faffi, do you labor for free? |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by faffi on 08/12/18 at 01:55:11 716E686F72754474447C6E62291B0 wrote:
Yes, but I do not go to work for free. IMO, there is a massive difference between making a living and doing whatever it takes to make as much money as possible. Moral versus none. Now, I am not saying that the American public lacks moral, but there seems to be a greater than normal tolerance for making money at all cost and to praise the billionaires, no matter how they became rich. I could be wrong, though, since I'm only a bloody foreigner. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by raydawg on 08/12/18 at 09:11:12 6661666669000 wrote:
Yes, but I do not go to work for free. IMO, there is a massive difference between making a living and doing whatever it takes to make as much money as possible. Moral versus none. Now, I am not saying that the American public lacks moral, but there seems to be a greater than normal tolerance for making money at all cost and to praise the billionaires, no matter how they became rich. I could be wrong, though, since I'm only a bloody foreigner.[/quote] Odd, Trump wants others in NATO, etc, to start paying their fair share, and folks cry foul. Oh yeah, America has more money ::) |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by faffi on 08/12/18 at 11:11:30 Isn't that example going off on a tangent? To me, seeming opening for asbestos production and encouraging coal production are just two examples of plenty money making now being more vital than morality and the future generations. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/12/18 at 11:20:12 I'll agree asbestos isn't something to mess with, But coal is better than the environmental disaster of nuclear and the rush to immature technologies calling them sustainable is bullshit. They are nasty for the environment and aren't nearly as productive as advertised. Read about the decay of solar panels in different environments and you'll have to hunt for the real value of those awful windmills. Coal use doesn't have to be nasty. Scrubbers and other technologies clean up the exhaust. I never have figured out why Clinton made mining the cleanest coal we know of illegal. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/12/18 at 11:41:40 352A2C2B3631003000382A266D5F0 wrote:
I hate to break your bubble, but there is no such thing as mining "clean coal". Coal is coal is coal. The only thing that's "clean" is the technology that scrubs it. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/12/18 at 17:04:42 Your ignorance and inherent dishonesty are on display, again. You pretend I didn't use the comparative term of cleanest, comparing what Clinton outlawed to the most common coal types used. For your edification. Anthracite: Anthracite has the highest carbon content (86% to 97%). Rare in the U.S., it comprises only 0.2% of total coal production. All the anthracite mines in the U.S. are located in northeast Pennsylvania. Seven Billion Tons of Anthracite Coal. In 2013 the United States used less than 1 million tons of coal. So, the Anthracite at Grand Stairway Escalante was enough to last this country almost 7,000 years!!! Anthracite Coal, by the way, is virtually smoke and emission free. Pollution problem solved. http://www.citizensgroup.us/utahs-clean-coal-rip-off-and-clintons-gift-to-communist-china/ |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/12/18 at 18:27:46 2A353334292E1F2F1F27353972400 wrote:
There is no such thing as "clean coal". Just because it has a higher carbon content means nothing. Coal is coal is coal is coal..... For your education: http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/clean-coal.htm http://insideenergy.org/2016/10/11/clean-coal-fact-or-fiction/ No matter what your orange messiah has said: “There is a thing called clean coal. Coal will last for a thousand years in this country.” What is clean coal? There is no precise definition of clean coal. The coal industry’s main lobbying group claims the term was coined by Congress in the 1980s. It has since been popularized by the energy industry to describe a whole range of technologies, including carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS). |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/12/18 at 23:22:38 You don't remember that I was talking about this before Trump was a topic? You're so unable to admit being wrong it's hilarious. I don't care what you think. I know what you are. You can read the article or not. Keep pretending you're the one who is correct. It's your delusion and costs me nothing. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/12/18 at 23:32:03 You're a joke. Clinton created the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument to close the largest anthracite coal field in the nation along the Kaiparowitz Plateau in Kane County, Utah. The Kentucky-based Andalux Resources coal company held leases on the 3,400 acre coal field which contains about 7 billion tons of low sulfur anthracite coal worth $1.5 trillion in 1996 dollars. When Clinton nationalized 1/7th of Utah, he killed 1,000 jobs and about $50 million in payroll dollars per year going into Kane County. Working class Utahans lost their livelihood, but Clinton paid his expected quid pro quo to a foreigner who could not legally donate money to Clinton’s political campaign.“ This was no gift to the environmentalists. Low sulfer, anthracite coal is the cleanest burning coal their is on the planet. Coal is responsible for 33% of U.S energy production. It also known as the major source of pollution in the United States. Anthracite coal is only .2% of all US Coal production. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by faffi on 08/13/18 at 01:05:04 I will have to say that jog2 is correct here; while there is no such thing as clean coal, or clean burning coal, the anthracite coal is having a significantly less negative impact on the environment than the "dirtier" coal. Hence, as long as you are determined to burn coal, anthracite is definitely preferable. Compared to clean, natural gas, not so much. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 04:42:24 213E383F22251424142C3E32794B0 wrote:
Everyone can see what you're doing jog. I'm not the one who's pretending. I'm merely posting the truth. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 04:55:43 3E393E3E31580 wrote:
Faffi - as you just said, there is no such thing as clean coal. This is my point. Higher carbon content just means more CO2 emissions - so in some respects, anthracite is "dirtier". Yes, it might burn more efficiently, but it's not clean. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 04:59:39 213E383F22251424142C3E32794B0 wrote:
Anthracite has the highest CO2 emissions - its not "clean". Coal is coal is coal. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/13/18 at 06:10:48 Wrong.. Read it. Co2 isn't toxic. And of COURSE it has more co2. It's higher CARBON CONTENT is the very thing that makes it Cleaner BURNING. Try to be able to be wrong without a days long battle. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 06:17:45 6C7375726F6859695961737F34060 wrote:
CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Please feel free to continue the personal insults - it doesn't help your case. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by MnSpring on 08/13/18 at 07:28:13 617F70717C617A67150 wrote:
So their is no such thing, as 'clean' coal ? Then their must not be any, 'clean' gas. Or, 'clean' Diesel fuel. Or, 'clean' garbage, (Which for the, 'special people', I have heard several times, recycling, produces, 'clean', garbage) etc/etc/etc/etc/etc/etc Perhaps, their is not any, 'clean' air ? |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 08:46:55 02211C3F3D2621284F0 wrote:
So their is no such thing, as 'clean' coal ? No, there is not. Then their must not be any, 'clean' gas. No, there is not. Or, 'clean' Diesel fuel. Or, 'clean' garbage, (Which for the, 'special people', I have heard several times, recycling, produces, 'clean', garbage) etc/etc/etc/etc/etc/etc Perhaps, their is not any, 'clean' air ? No, there is clean air. [/quote] Anything that burns is dirty. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/13/18 at 12:09:56 And some coal is dirtier than others. Read the original post. Cleanest coal available, And it's MASSIVELY cleaner than the most easily and cheapest coal THAT WE ARE USING RIGHT NOW. And Clinton made it off limits. Pure genius. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by MnSpring on 08/13/18 at 15:36:49 6F717E7F726F74691B0 wrote:
Well then, Electric produced by Photovoltaic, is NOT Clean. Electric produced by Hydropower, is NOT Clean. Electric, produced by wind/tide/waves, is NOT Clean. Because to, make, every one of those things above, you have to use a, ‘UN-Clean’, something (or several un-clean things), to do so. To keep any of the above functioning, you have to have, Un-Clean, things to keep them so. So What happens now ? Should we accept something that is, ‘cleaner’, than before ? Or just say: “…Anything that burns is dirty…” ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by raydawg on 08/13/18 at 17:03:26 1E3D0023213A3D34530 wrote:
Well then, Electric produced by Photovoltaic, is NOT Clean. Electric produced by Hydropower, is NOT Clean. Electric, produced by wind/tide/waves, is NOT Clean. Because to, make, every one of those things above, you have to use a, ‘UN-Clean’, something (or several un-clean things), to do so. To keep any of the above functioning, you have to have, Un-Clean, things to keep them so. So What happens now ? Should we accept something that is, ‘cleaner’, than before ? Or just say: “…Anything that burns is dirty…” ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D [/quote] A bong dude.....????? Bummer ;D |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/13/18 at 17:42:08 Nuclear creates crap that remains deadly for how long? How's fukushima doing? Condemning the best coal in America, while mining low quality, high sulfur coal, is not exactly a brilliant position, IMO. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 21:22:29 4764597A7863646D0A0 wrote:
Well then, Electric produced by Photovoltaic, is NOT Clean. Electric produced by Hydropower, is NOT Clean. Electric, produced by wind/tide/waves, is NOT Clean. Because to, make, every one of those things above, you have to use a, ‘UN-Clean’, something (or several un-clean things), to do so. LOL - seriously mn? That is a silly argument. All the energy produced from these sources is clean. No emissions. Fine, perhaps the building of the structures, etc. are not "clean", but then, neither are the massive scrubbers for coal. Nice try, but no. To keep any of the above functioning, you have to have, Un-Clean, things to keep them so. What do you mean? You think it's just as dirty as maintaining a coal fired plant? Do you really? So What happens now ? Should we accept something that is, ‘cleaner’, than before ? Or just say: “…Anything that burns is dirty…” Yes mn - anything that burns is dirty. What's so hard to understand? ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by T And T Garage on 08/13/18 at 21:25:37 3F2026213C3B0A3A0A32202C67550 wrote:
Condemning our population with pollution is not a good idea either. The smart money's on renewables. Too bad the big money isn't behind it like it is with fossil fuels. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by eau de sauvage on 08/14/18 at 02:49:59 But coal is better than the environmental disaster of nuclear Completely incorrect, you need to brush up on LFTR reactors. https://youtu.be/uK367T7h6ZY We could have been using it already. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by faffi on 08/14/18 at 03:46:46 Nuclear power is very, very clean - unless you have an accident. Plus there is the waste to worry about for just about ever. Personally, I hope they find less dangerous ways to extract energy. Still, given only one of two choices; living next door to a coal power plant or a nuclear power plant, I'd definitely go with the latter. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by Eegore on 08/14/18 at 05:48:15 As long as we are willing to pay someone else to create enough energy to support our personal usage then we will have these problems. I don't think there's a single national or global solution, each region needs to examine and use the best power they can. For instance wind and solar work where most my property is as there's a lot of wind and its sunny most the year now. My personal property puts power into the grid. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by justin_o_guy2 on 08/14/18 at 11:27:51 That being true doesn't make either not a source of pollution. It's all gotta get made. Copper and plastic and batteries, everything required energy to create. And factories to be built and the manufacturing process for everything that that system is. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by eau de sauvage on 08/14/18 at 22:33:44 6A6D6A6A650C0 wrote:
That does not make any sense at all. It depends on the technology. The only nuclear power that is both safe and very low waste is LFTR reactors. Other nuclear reactor produce dangerous waste whether or not they have an accident. https://youtu.be/bbyr7jZOllI |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by WebsterMark on 08/15/18 at 15:13:33 Construct a space elevator and the primary function for it would be to get waste to a space station. A launching system can be developed to send waste into the sun. Difficult? Yes. Expensive? Hell yes. But if it was done, the biggest drawback to expanding nuclear energy would be removed. |
|
Title: Re: Never mind....... Post by MnSpring on 08/16/18 at 08:21:43 47554142555351340 wrote:
How many Thorium Reactors are in Australia ? The idea developed in the 60’s, yet just a decade later, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory closed in the 70’s. The only new plant is now just coming on line, ( I think it is in the Netherlands). some 40+ years later. And it is totally experimental ! The idea could be very good, but we just don’t know it yet. All the screaming about it, are from people who get, ‘FUNDED”, to find out, because they just don’t know. But they want the, ‘FUNDING’, from Your Pocket so, they, can drive a Mercedes, while you drive a Ford Focus. Instead of using the, 'FUNDING', they get to actually, 'FUND' the quest for knowledge, a great deal of it is paying for a car, (etc.etc.etc), for there own personal enjoyment. In using this Thorium Reactor idea. It still has the problem of NOT, using a renewable source, and the by product is Still dangerous. Also, it may seem like the design is simple, it is actually more complicated than the known design, which that information is shared freely. After the experiments at this new Thorium Reactors are done, their will be information on it will/will not work better than something else. And don’t forget, any, ‘Reactor’, using any fuel, if started now, will take 16-18 years to be up and running. Where will Photovoltaic be in 20 Years ? Where will LED’s be in 20 years? |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |