[N8 v2.0]

Saving or not wasting? Not necessarily the same thing.

Either way, better than using so well done. Still no reason to be a jerk about someone else pointing out environmental destruction.

This would be energy that had been, and would have continued to be used, prior to my involvement. So 'saved' is the correct term.

Enviromental destruction is a matter of nature... earthquakes, volcanos, tidal waves, droughts, floods.... Drilling for oil can be, and is done, with care to the enviroment... at least where the US is concerned... just wait another 5 years when China starts sucking on it big time... now there's a country that is an enviromental disaster... I guess the Great Socialist Experiment didn't address enviromental concerns..

 

[N8 v2.0]

is that really true? why do some people recycle, carpool, or otherwise try to reduce energy use, and some don't?

it always amazes me to see the relative amount of trash cans and recycle bins on my street; some people have one trash can and two full recycle bins, others have 3 full trash cans and no recycle bins.

Of course it takes more energy to recycle some products (like plastic) than it would take to make them from scratch.

 

[DRB]

is that really true? why do some people recycle, carpool, or otherwise try to reduce energy use, and some don't?

From an overall perspective, it is true. Of course you will have a small number who never change and a small number of those that will change at a whim. But for the most part folks don't modify their behavior until such time that it hurts less to change than it does to stay the same.

it always amazes me to see the relative amount of trash cans and recycle bins on my street; some people have one trash can and two full recycle bins, others have 3 full trash cans and no recycle bins.

Take away their recycle bins and only have recycle stations and see how many folks continue to recycle.

 

[SilentJ]

Did you get a chance to see the old forest and the re-forested areas?

No. My site was 9.5 hours away from here and Ft. Mac would be another few....

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Maybe you should. The US has shown time and time again an unwillingness to change its habits. Should the World sit on its ass and wait for something to happen that has never happened before? The US isn't going to change its habits until they are forced to do so. But as long as the other countries allow THEIR own greed to overcome what's right don't get your hopes up.

Or you can sit around and talk about how you are going to drive less, in a more fuel effcient car, using energy efficient light bulbs and thinking how much more superior you are for having ZERO effect on the problem.

The only way folks change their habits, especially when it comes to fuel consumption, is by making the pain of change less than the pain of staying the same.

Before you start finger pointing, you might want to know something about my view on this situation. As I've said before on this forum, I do quite a few things to alleviate my specific footprint, but I also have noted that without a comprehensive policy it does have ZERO effect. Your criticism is mislaid.

Second, are you seriously saying that we don't have to worry about our habits because other countries are facilitating, so it's not our fault?

 

[BurlyShirley]

Second, are you seriously saying that we don't have to worry about our habits because other countries are facilitating, so it's not our fault?

Cant speak for DRB, but it seems to me these countries are just as at fault if they're willing to trade their environmental soundness for quick cash, and hence, dont need to be apologized to.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Pointing out destruction is fine. Ive been pissed about some things recently, but apologizing TO canada FOR canada SELLING their crap to US is just retarded.

No, it isn't. We are the worst offender. The worst. We are completely unapologetic about it, and we are doing next to nothing to alleviate that fact. We should be apologizing to other countries for screwing up the global environment without regard for anyone else. We should be apologizing that the most powerful nation in the world and one that arguably is the most tech savvy refuses to invest in technologies to alleviate these problems and adopts a ostrich-like, head-in-the-sand approach. To me, it is shameful.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Cant speak for DRB, but it seems to me these countries are just as at fault if they're willing to trade their environmental soundness for quick cash, and hence, dont need to be apologized to.

And, like I've said, what they do does not excuse our actions.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Cant speak for DRB, but it seems to me these countries are just as at fault if they're willing to trade their environmental soundness for quick cash, and hence, dont need to be apologized to.

And if the US quit buying... they'd whore their natural resources to the next hightest bidder and think nothing of it... all for a few bazillion dollars and some shiney new fighter jets and AK-47's.

 

[fluff]

And if the US quit buying... they'd whore their natural resources to the next hightest bidder and think nothing of it... all for a few bazillion dollars and some shiney new fighter jets and AK-47's.

Maybe, maybe not - so long as the US is willing to shell out the dollars themselves we'll never know.

Furthermore 'Countries' are not sentient beings, these are deals done between rich people to further enrich themselves, they care more about money than the environment. Perhaps if they put their money to better use in researching alternative energy we'd address the problem in good time. Perhaps a government 'for the people' (god forbid we see one of those) would push them in that direction.

It's not just the US but as the biggest energy consumer (and richest nation) they have the biggest share of the problem, the best opportunity and need to take the lead

 

[DRB]

Before you start finger pointing, you might want to know something about my view on this situation. As I've said before on this forum, I do quite a few things to alleviate my specific footprint, but I also have noted that without a comprehensive policy it does have ZERO effect. Your criticism is mislaid.

I don't live and die by your every word and to be honest have paid little or no attention to your posts in the past. Nor do I feel compelled to waste one iota of time to review what you have said to catch up.

Second, are you seriously saying that we don't have to worry about our habits because other countries are facilitating, so it's not our fault?

What's wrong with doing this? You seem to be absolving the world of its responsibility, so why can't I give the US the same free pass?

My point, and this is the fourth time in making it, is that to expect the US, thru government policy, consumer reformation or just hippy life styles, to make a serious reduction in our hydrocarbon consumption is silly. It doesn't mean you can't keep tilting that windmill but you better start looking for other EXTERNAL solutions and stimulus if you expect some meaningful change to occur.

And the US would make good practice for it because China is going down that same road a lot faster with a lot less care for the damage it does.

 

[DRB]

(and richest nation) they have the biggest share of the problem, the best opportunity and need to take the lead

No, it isn't. We are the worst offender. The worst. We are completely unapologetic about it, and we are doing next to nothing to alleviate that fact. We should be apologizing to other countries for screwing up the global environment without regard for anyone else. We should be apologizing that the most powerful nation in the world and one that arguably is the most tech savvy refuses to invest in technologies to alleviate these problems and adopts a ostrich-like, head-in-the-sand approach. To me, it is shameful.

The US should do this, the US should do that. You and people like you have been saying this since moby dick was a minnow and guess where we are because of it..... the exact same place.

Aren't you getting it? The US isn't going to take the lead, it isn't going to modify its behavior, isn't going to change the way its been doing business. What action has the US taken in the last 100 years that would suggest to you its capable of making the changes you believe are necessary?

And if the best you can do is say we should apologize because of it, you are the one burying your head in the sand.

Go look for another solution to the problem.

 

[fluff]

The US should do this, the US should do that. You and people like you have been saying this since moby dick was a minnow and guess where we are because of it..... the exact same place.

Aren't you getting it? The US isn't going to take the lead, it isn't going to modify its behavior, isn't going to change the way its been doing business. What action has the US taken in the last 100 years that would suggest to you its capable of making the changes you believe are necessary?

And if the best you can do is say we should apologize because of it, you are the one burying your head in the sand.

Go look for another solution to the problem.

Did I say you should apologise?

Do you think the US should continue on its present course?

Why is an opinion on this so upsetting to you?

No, I do not believe he US will change its attitude, nor will the UK, China or most other nations. Doesn't mean I shouldn't post about it here does it?

 

[ghostrider]

Of course it takes more energy to recycle some products (like plastic) than it would take to make them from scratch.

Where do you get this drivel? It must be from the same place every other short sited Republican gets it from. Can you please point me to the source so I can stop wasting my time foolishly trying to re-use something reusable?

 

[Inclag]

Where do you get this drivel? It must be from the same place every other short sited Republican gets it from. Can you please point me to the source so I can stop wasting my time foolishly trying to re-use something reusable?

And more importantly, what are plastics made from.

:cough: petrochemicals :cough:

 

[jac]

We live today to steal from tomorrow.
Spend today as tomorrow the price will rise.
Expell gas for it will hurt holding it in.
Cycle today for tomorrow you may have a flat.

The whole damn economic equation is screwed!
An empire is built around the automobile. From early in the morning as everyone rushes to work for that first pot of coffee only to get caught in traffic. Don't forget the core working hours 9 to 5. As the roads are congested with cars. Idling, sitting and waiting as people are in their portable living room. We now have mobile DVD players, cell phones, comfy couches in a mobile living room. A push button society gone lazy.
Picture ourselves 100 years from now as we evolve - we will have this massive 50lbs head with this plump rear end that will fit the comfiest of chairs. Shaped like a pear almost. Evolution due to laziness.

Our culture breads consumerism. From the pen we write with to the house we live in. So?
We live on a finite planet with a limited amount of resources. We came to North America to prosper, but there are only so many cookies to go around. And, with a select few prospering from our natural resources by quick sell offs, I think our resources will be chewed up in a short period of time. Where will we go next - to the moon and beyond?
Other nations on this fine planet have adapted and they had to. Putting in place community cycling pools - where one can rent a bike for cheap for the day for their daily commute into work or a simple ride to the store. We are far far behind them for our threat to resource shortage is small (I heard the US is in a oil deficit in the billions of dollars though - formulates a huge trade deficit). Once the threat is in our face, then we will be forced to change.
I heard hydrogen and other sources of fuel are a long long ways away for it takes far more energy to convert it to hydrogen.

I surly hope North America doesn't sell itself short and fast. We consume far more than what we need right now. All to fill our shortfalls. Mindya, short and fast isn't bad. I'd sooner have someone take a bullit to my head than tear me apart limb by limb.

What we take today leaves less for tomorrow.

Bike to work!

 

[Echo]

Where do you get this drivel? It must be from the same place every other short sited Republican gets it from. Can you please point me to the source so I can stop wasting my time foolishly trying to re-use something reusable?

The problem is that everyone wants their laundry detergent bottle to be the perfect shade of blue, so all recycled plastic has to go through a bunch of basically unnecessary processing to make it "pretty" enough to use again.

 

[DRB]

Did I say you should apologise?

Do you think the US should continue on its present course?

Why is an opinion on this so upsetting to you?

No, I do not believe he US will change its attitude, nor will the UK, China or most other nations. Doesn't mean I shouldn't post about it here does it?

You didn't and I only quoted your post because of the US should lead line.

You want to know what pisses me off about it? Because it gets us NOWHERE. The status quo is maintained. Which means that the spiral continues.

What should the US do? It should enact a national energy policy with near impossible goals in hydrocarbon consumption reduction over the next 10 years. Should ban cars that are don't get 30mpg at minimum. Invest trillions of dollars in alternative fuel technology and development and production. Want me to go on, well I don't..... And the chances of that as things stand now are exactly the same as an astroid crashing from the sky and hitting me in the next 3 seconds. 1.....2.....3..... I'm still here.

Some external force is going to have to force the level of changes necessary. It isn't going to occur of this country's own free will.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Where do you get this drivel? It must be from the same place every other short sited Republican gets it from. Can you please point me to the source so I can stop wasting my time foolishly trying to re-use something reusable?

Reusing most plastics is the key... recycling is not.

Recycling some plastics might be worse than throwing them out. Though there is no decisive research on the environmental impacts of recycling plastic, relating the economic cost of disposal to recycling shows that the cost to recycle plastic is $360 per ton while normal disposal cost is $250 per ton. The difference is mostly caused by recycling collection trucks. Unlike garbage trucks, recycling collection trucks don't compact their load. Because light plastics fill up a lot of space, recycling collection trucks end up consuming a lot of fuel for small quantities of plastic, increasing the environmental impact.

- http://www.ilea.org/lcas/Tellus.html

[

B]Recycling Can Save Energy[/B]
It almost always takes less energy to make a product from recycled materials than it does to make it from new materials. Using recycled aluminum scrap to make new aluminum cans, for example, uses 96 percent less energy than making aluminum cans from bauxite ore, the raw material used to make aluminum. One exception to the recycling-saves-energy rule is plastics. Sometimes it takes more energy to recycle plastics than it does to use all new materials.

- http://www.eia.doe.gov/kids/energyfacts/saving/recycling/solidwaste/recycling.html

 

[N8 v2.0]

You didn't and I only quoted your post because of the US should lead line.

You want to know what pisses me off about it? Because it gets us NOWHERE. The status quo is maintained. Which means that the spiral continues.

What should the US do? It should enact a national energy policy with near impossible goals in hydrocarbon consumption reduction over the next 10 years. Should ban cars that are don't get 30mpg at minimum. Invest trillions of dollars in alternative fuel technology and development and production. Want me to go on, well I don't..... And the chances of that as things stand now are exactly the same as an astroid crashing from the sky and hitting me in the next 3 seconds. 1.....2.....3..... I'm still here.

Some external force is going to have to force the level of changes necessary. It isn't going to occur of this country's own free will.

Necessity is the mother of invention.

The problem with "cheap oil" is it means there is insuffienct return on investment for new technologies and therefore interest in developing them in the private sector is low. However, as oil costs rise, the savings to investment ratio increases and a lot of technologies start to make economic sense.

And, yes, it will be the American private sector that will bring these technologies to the market place... not US government and not some other nation.

 

[narlus]

Take away their recycle bins and only have recycle stations and see how many folks continue to recycle.

right, but how hard is it to provide some infrastructure to promote this? you ever check out the public trash receptacles in germany?

and N8, i'm sure there could be advances in efficiency re: plastics recycling, but the plastic industry would probably rather just crank out more new containers, and lobbies accordingly. just a guess, but i'd be willing to bet it's right.

 

[N8 v2.0]

Big Plastic strikes again!

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I don't live and die by your every word and to be honest have paid little or no attention to your posts in the past. Nor do I feel compelled to waste one iota of time to review what you have said to catch up.

So, you'd rather make uninformed insinuations about me and my character? Nice.

What's wrong with doing this? You seem to be absolving the world of its responsibility, so why can't I give the US the same free pass?

My point, and this is the fourth time in making it, is that to expect the US, thru government policy, consumer reformation or just hippy life styles, to make a serious reduction in our hydrocarbon consumption is silly. It doesn't mean you can't keep tilting that windmill but you better start looking for other EXTERNAL solutions and stimulus if you expect some meaningful change to occur.

And the US would make good practice for it because China is going down that same road a lot faster with a lot less care for the damage it does.

Nothing is wrong with laying blame where it is due, but for the umpteenth time, it does NOT absolve us of our responsibilities. I'm not absolving the world, but I am saying that we should take responsibility for ourselves and stop laying the blame on everyone else but us.

Are you seriously saying that US policy can't do diddly about climate change and pollution to save the environment?

 

[Old Man G Funk]

The US should do this, the US should do that. You and people like you have been saying this since moby dick was a minnow and guess where we are because of it..... the exact same place.

Aren't you getting it? The US isn't going to take the lead, it isn't going to modify its behavior, isn't going to change the way its been doing business. What action has the US taken in the last 100 years that would suggest to you its capable of making the changes you believe are necessary?

And if the best you can do is say we should apologize because of it, you are the one burying your head in the sand.

Go look for another solution to the problem.

What action has the US taken in the past that shows we are capable of it? WWII. Yeah, I said WWII. This country has the ability and the talent to adapt to changing environments. We have the ability to develop new technologies that will seriously lessen our dependence on oil. Perhaps it will take a catastrophe to get the ball rolling, but this country is capable of it. But, instead there are people like you who say, "Well, we can't do anything about it, so why try. Who cares if the environment goes down the tubes, it's not like I had anything to do with it."

 

[N8 v2.0]

So, you'd rather make uninformed insinuations about me and my character? Nice.

Nothing is wrong with laying blame where it is due, but for the umpteenth time, it does NOT absolve us of our responsibilities. I'm not absolving the world, but I am saying that we should take responsibility for ourselves and stop laying the blame on everyone else but us.

Are you seriously saying that US policy can't do diddly about climate change and pollution to save the environment?

I blame the US for birthing and fueling the post-WWII industrial age... and the medical technology age... and the Space age and the Information Age.... and the Energy Age...

Freekin' USA... capitalist bastards. The world would be much better off if Europe were running the show... or maybe the Japanese..




Everyday must absolutely suck when you are a liberal living in the US...

 

[DRB]

What action has the US taken in the past that shows we are capable of it? WWII. Yeah, I said WWII. This country has the ability and the talent to adapt to changing environments. We have the ability to develop new technologies that will seriously lessen our dependence on oil. Perhaps it will take a catastrophe to get the ball rolling, but this country is capable of it.

Thanks for making my point. The US had major league head in the sand leading up to World War II. It took a WAR to get the US in gear and rethink how it interacted with the world. How about the Space Race? It took the Soviets to put the fear of God in us and get moving on our efforts in that arena.

History has proven time and time and time again that it takes a big stick to the eye for the US to modify its course. Denying that is plain silly.

Nor does it absolve the US of responsibility but since when does that mean anything? If my neighbor throws his trash in my backyard, I can stand around and say "Well Bob should know better than that and I hope he will take responsibility and stop that." and hope and pray he stops but seriously what are the odds? At what point does it become my responsiblity to take some action to stop him or at least modify his actions.

As such the rest of the World should sack up and figure out how to get the US to get to changing.

OR you can continue to scream for an apology thinking that's going to make one iotas difference. Oh wait I already provided the apology so that pretty much fulfills your requirement.

But, instead there are people like you who say, "Well, we can't do anything about it, so why try. Who cares if the environment goes down the tubes, it's not like I had anything to do with it."

Yep that's the way my words should be interpreted. You sure are a clever one. What's really funny if you had any idea what I did for a living it would make it even better.

So, you'd rather make uninformed insinuations about me and my character? Nice.

Do as I say not as I do is it?

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Thanks for making my point. The US had major league head in the sand leading up to World War II. It took a WAR to get the US in gear and rethink how it interacted with the world. How about the Space Race? It took the Soviets to put the fear of God in us and get moving on our efforts in that arena.

History has proven time and time and time again that it takes a big stick to the eye for the US to modify its course. Denying that is plain silly.

Oh, so now your sole point is that the US can do this, but it will only happen with a war or some catastrophe, which is funny considering that I was earlier lamenting that we might have to have that happen and I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. Also, I was responding to your challenge to find some time that the US has been capable of doing this. You asked for capability, I gave you a time it happened. We have the capability. It may take a catastrophe for us to wake up, but it might not, and I hope it is the latter.

Nor does it absolve the US of responsibility but since when does that mean anything? If my neighbor throws his trash in my backyard, I can stand around and say "Well Bob should know better than that and I hope he will take responsibility and stop that." and hope and pray he stops but seriously what are the odds? At what point does it become my responsiblity to take some action to stop him or at least modify his actions.

Ever heard of Kyoto? Many other countries are making strides to get us to change our ways and so far our leaders (Dem. and Rep.) have mostly thumbed their noses at those other countries.

OR you can continue to scream for an apology thinking that's going to make one iotas difference. Oh wait I already provided the apology so that pretty much fulfills your requirement.

Please write something intelligible next time. This makes no sense.

Yep that's the way my words should be interpreted. You sure are a clever one. What's really funny if you had any idea what I did for a living it would make it even better.

Do as I say not as I do is it?

Not at all. I was going off of specific things you said in this very thread, like this:

My point, and this is the fourth time in making it, is that to expect the US, thru government policy, consumer reformation or just hippy life styles, to make a serious reduction in our hydrocarbon consumption is silly. It doesn't mean you can't keep tilting that windmill but you better start looking for other EXTERNAL solutions and stimulus if you expect some meaningful change to occur.

Or this:

Maybe you should. The US has shown time and time again an unwillingness to change its habits. Should the World sit on its ass and wait for something to happen that has never happened before? The US isn't going to change its habits until they are forced to do so. But as long as the other countries allow THEIR own greed to overcome what's right don't get your hopes up.

Or you can sit around and talk about how you are going to drive less, in a more fuel effcient car, using energy efficient light bulbs and thinking how much more superior you are for having ZERO effect on the problem.

The only way folks change their habits, especially when it comes to fuel consumption, is by making the pain of change less than the pain of staying the same.

If I misinterpreted your words, then maybe you should stop blaming everyone else but us for our oil consumption and stop lamenting how there's nothing to be done.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Did I say you should apologise?

I also never said anyone else has to apologize. I think we should, as a country, but that's my opinion. I'm not trying to force anyone to do as I have done. I have my reasons.

 

[DRB]

Oh, so now your sole point is that the US can do this, but it will only happen with a war or some catastrophe, which is funny considering that I was earlier lamenting that we might have to have that happen and I'm hoping it doesn't come to that. Also, I was responding to your challenge to find some time that the US has been capable of doing this. You asked for capability, I gave you a time it happened. We have the capability. It may take a catastrophe for us to wake up, but it might not, and I hope it is the latter.

And the time you mention that the US changed course or showed capacity, the US got a big sharp stick to the eye.

Ever heard of Kyoto? Many other countries are making strides to get us to change our ways and so far our leaders (Dem. and Rep.) have mostly thumbed their noses at those other countries..

Kyoto? The city in Japan?

So then they really aren't making strides to make us change our ways are they? Again the biggest impact on the US's energy consciousness has been the increased price of gas. But even that has barely scratched the surface.

So again if I'm the rest of the world I'm not holding my breath for the US to all to all of a sudden to start acting in my best interest.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

And the time you mention that the US changed course or showed capacity, the US got a big sharp stick to the eye.

So, if you want to assert that was your point all along, so be it, but considering that I was already talking about how I hoped it wouldn't come to that but feared that it would...well, you can excuse why I thought that you might actually have a point that wasn't already said. But, hey, coming from someone who admitted to making straw man characterizations...I should probably have known better.

Edit: To clarify - I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't arguing something that had already agreed was something that I worried about, but alas you proved that I should have doubted you.

Kyoto? The city in Japan?

So then they really aren't making strides to make us change our ways are they? Again the biggest impact on the US's energy consciousness has been the increased price of gas. But even that has barely scratched the surface.

So again if I'm the rest of the world I'm not holding my breath for the US to all to all of a sudden to start acting in my best interest.

You don't think Kyoto was at least an attempt.

Of course, I still see you looking at it as if it is the rest of the world's responsibility to make us change.

 

[Echo]

I think it's pretty much understood that the Kyoto Protocol is a good idea. The problem is that it would be basically impossible for the US to commit to it without sending itself into total financial ruin.

Personally I could give a rat's ass if every CEO and rich stockholder in the country was suddenly flat broke, but there's no denying the absolute anarchy and mayhem that would ensue.

So just saying "well everyone else is signing up for Kyoto, why shouldn't we?" is not comparing apples to apples. The governments that are signing up have far less to lose and therefore have no problem signing it.

We definitely need to do something, but agreeing to adhere to a protocol that will literally doom the country is not the answer.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

I think it's pretty much understood that the Kyoto Protocol is a good idea. The problem is that it would be basically impossible for the US to commit to it without sending itself into total financial ruin.

Personally I could give a rat's ass if every CEO and rich stockholder in the country was suddenly flat broke, but there's no denying the absolute anarchy and mayhem that would ensue.

So just saying "well everyone else is signing up for Kyoto, why shouldn't we?" is not comparing apples to apples. The governments that are signing up have far less to lose and therefore have no problem signing it.

We definitely need to do something, but agreeing to adhere to a protocol that will literally doom the country is not the answer.

I was using it as an example of other countries pressuring us.

 

[Echo]

I was using it as an example of other countries pressuring us.

Aha. That will teach me to not bother reading the entire thread

Actually probably not

 

[DRB]

So, if you want to assert that was your point all along, so be it, but considering that I was already talking about how I hoped it wouldn't come to that but feared that it would...well, you can excuse why I thought that you might actually have a point that wasn't already said. But, hey, coming from someone who admitted to making straw man characterizations...I should probably have known better.

No your point is that we should give the world some sort of apology for being the US. That's it. Oh and hoping that all of a sudden for the first time in history the US government turns into the world's good fairy and makes the world a place full of lollipops, sugar plums and where all of your dreams come true because you want it to be so.

You didn't start making the point about catastrophe and disaster until I pointed it out to you.

Edit: To clarify - I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt that you weren't arguing something that had already agreed was something that I worried about, but alas you proved that I should have doubted you.

Clever but completely irrelevant.

You don't think Kyoto was at least an attempt.

Of course, I still see you looking at it as if it is the rest of the world's responsibility to make us change.

No I think Kyoto is a joke. It has no teeth and the countries that did sign it prompty decided to not give a damn about it.

Well you know what, if the World is bigger than the US, then damn right its their responsibility to do something meaningful instead of sitting around waiting for the US to get off the stick. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.

I go back to my orginial post in this thread, its too bad Canada has abdicated its responsibility for its own natural resources by hoping that the US would step up for them. In lollipop land just maybe that happens, in the real world no way.

 

[sanjuro]

I don't think we do enough as Americans. But don't blame us for Canadian oil drilling. It is their job to police their own industry. P.S. Royal Dutch Shell is not an American company.

 

[N8 v2.0]

A lot of libs talk a lot about the oil habits of the rest of us while not setting the example...

http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155472

 

[Old Man G Funk]

No your point is that we should give the world some sort of apology for being the US. That's it. Oh and hoping that all of a sudden for the first time in history the US government turns into the world's good fairy and makes the world a place full of lollipops, sugar plums and where all of your dreams come true because you want it to be so.

Obviously you can't read.

You didn't start making the point about catastrophe and disaster until I pointed it out to you.

#12 dipsh*t.

Clever but completely irrelevant.

But obviously spot on with your last comment.

No I think Kyoto is a joke. It has no teeth and the countries that did sign it prompty decided to not give a damn about it.

Well you know what, if the World is bigger than the US, then damn right its their responsibility to do something meaningful instead of sitting around waiting for the US to get off the stick. To do otherwise would be irresponsible.

I go back to my orginial post in this thread, its too bad Canada has abdicated its responsibility for its own natural resources by hoping that the US would step up for them. In lollipop land just maybe that happens, in the real world no way.

Other countries don't give a damn, because if the worst polluter doesn't step up to the plate, their efforts mean about diddly.

Go ahead and go back to your first post, I don't give a sh*t. I'll go back to my response to it. You can try to denigrate my position to lollipop land, but that would also denigrate most of what you said, so nice job.

 

[DRB]

Obviously you can't read.

#12 dipsh*t.

But obviously spot on with your last comment.

Other countries don't give a damn, because if the worst polluter doesn't step up to the plate, their efforts mean about diddly.

Go ahead and go back to your first post, I don't give a sh*t. I'll go back to my response to it. You can try to denigrate my position to lollipop land, but that would also denigrate most of what you said, so nice job.

Like I said you have no idea what you want except to apologize, which accomplishes absolutely NOTHING. But hey you keep on wishing, it'll all work out for you.

Dolt.

 

[Old Man G Funk]

Like I said you have no idea what you want except to apologize, which accomplishes absolutely NOTHING. But hey you keep on wishing, it'll all work out for you.

Dolt.

That's rich coming from the guy who admitted that he doesn't read my comments, yet feels eminently qualified to make assumptions about me and about what I've said and not said. You are a class act.

 

[Chunky Munkey]

It's a shame that Canada hasn't done more to protect its own natural resources........

You GOTTA be KIDDING ME! You guys in Canada do protect your most valuable natural resources!! I can't get a good beer around here without paying through the nose for it. Molson and Moosehead are way out of my price range now. It's like Lobsters in Maine... I'll bet you guys get it cheap up there! And then jack up the price to keep us Americans from consuming all your beer like we do with the Arabs oil!

Okay but on a more SERIOUS note folks,

WE CAN stop American depency on foreign oil, by switching to ALCOHOL! BRAZIL did it! There was an Indian guy on TV the other night. He's a self made billionare and he was one of the founding members of Sun Micro Systems! He went to talk to President Bush about switching to Alcohol and how our country can become independant from oil... HE said in as little as FIVE YEARS we can be completely free from the Arabs and our dependancy for foreign oil! But he also said the reason why we can't on national TV as well. He said we can't because BIG OIL controls the U.S.A. and the politicians. He also said, when he took it the idea to Washington, a couple of big oil guys cornered him and said, "Take this as a warning. Be VERY careful what you are doing. Because we can drop our prices at any time..." Meaning if the country looked like we were going to stop using gasoline all together, Big Oil would drop the gas price so low, even as low as to .50 cents a gallon to compete with any demand for alcohol in an attempt to try to snuff out any start up companies looking to start up Alcohol Stations across the country. When he was asked, "Do you REALLY think that Big Oil companies would come down as low as to .50 cents a gallon to do and still be profitable?" He said, "YES! Absolutely! Even at .50 cents a gallon, they could still be profitable today." He said it's all been a farse. Oil doesn't cost that much to get out of the ground and to make. And a buddy of mine who sold his Exxon recently said when I mentioned it to him agreed with that assessment. He too said it's been a big huge case of fraud from the big oil companies since the fifties. This co-founder of Sun Micro Systems on TV said that Oil companies COULD sell gas NOW for as low as .50 cents a gallon to and it would still be profitable. He said American Big Oil would do it to compete with Alcohol which would be between .50 to .75 cents a gallon, in an attempt to just to keep Americans hooked on it and to try to snuff out the first ever attempt of a start up company that would offer Alcohol to American consumers on a broad scale to keep America's dependence on foriegn oil. THAT is a bold statement to make on National TV. I guess if you are worth billions you can tell off anyone, including big oil. This guy has got more than Donald Trump. This guy is so rich he could tell Donald Trump, "Ya FIYUD."

When we start switching all cars to Alcohol, the ARABS will come whining to us, "LOOK! Look here what we did for you, our American friends!!! We dropped the price back to $1.00 a gallon just for you!" Thats when it's time to say, "Thanks Ahkmed, but NO thanks!" We should UNLOAD the Saudis and NEVER go back. Then pull out of Iraq and concentrate our efforts on things more important. Like start making GOOD BEER! We can start with a new HUGE PIPELINE right in the heart of Moose country, right through the Canadian wilderness ay, that would bring the good Canadian water down here ay so we can make Moosehead and Molson RIGHT HERE AY! A few moose are a small amount to pay for GREAT BEER!

Seriously people it's time we get off oil. I think this country is due for a change. The guy on TV said we could be completely INDEPENT of Arab oil and completely dependent on Alcohol in FIVE YEARS! He said he's been trying for YEARS to get into speak with a president of the United States and was unsuccessful till now. When the spokesmen said, "Why do you think Washington is listening now?" He said, "Because the people are getting angry and complaining to the politicians about it and they're being pressured to come up with an ulternative because it's crippling the American economy. A lot of people are not making the money to compensate for the huge increase over the past three years and old folks on a fixed income are screwed.

C'mon! Wake up people! Bin Laden don't like us cuz of our oil interests in Arab countries... well, let's do him and all of his soon to be out of work buddies a favor! What are they gonna live off of if they can't sell oil to anyone anymore, RUGS?

ALCOHOL! I'd run my Cadillac AND my Vette on it. What do you need to do to use it in your regular car, a regulator or carb/intake adjustment? Right?

It's time WASHINGTON wake up and take notice!

We need to get OFF OIL! Listen to that billionare on TV. FIVE YEARS! And tell Ahkmed and RADO to GO F**K A CAMEL!

EVERYBODY!!! GRAB YOUR TORCHES!!! WHO'S WITH ME!!! :redhot: STORM THE CASTLE!! TAKE NO PRISONERS! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!