Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Mile Style
Ha ha ha, you could've just said: "I really have no proof of what I'm saying, and I think you can tell by my posts" - and we can.
Again, if you did some actual research and learned some facts, you probably would be singing a different tune - or at least wouldn't appear so ignorant.
Ha ha ha, yeah, unfortunately I am the one in the real world and you're the one relying on your misinformed/not-informed, not based in reality opinions. Read a book! I'm still waiting for a shread of proof of anything you're saying - hey opinions are great, truth and reality are better.
That is the most construed logic I have ever seen! Just because one way is profitable, no other way is profitable?!?!?  Please, stop, my sides are starting to hurt!!!!
So, here's your first lesson in reality: Oil (which is formed from fossil fuels) is non-renewable, meaning once it's gone, we can not produce any more. It can not be regenerated and doesn't "grow back" once it has been obtained. Thus, logically, oil will run out. You can not debate this fact, regardless of if it runs out tomorrow or in 100 years, the world does not, can not, have an endless supply of fossil fuels. Therefor we need to start thinking about alternative fuel sources.
Are you with me so far?
So, we have proved that energy can be harnessed from wind and the sun. Therefor it makes sense to use that energy to replace oil. The sooner we have this kind of infrastructure in place, the less of an impact on the economy and the environment, when the oil is depleted.
So, if sun or wind is not the answer, I would love to hear what you think the answer is, and hopefully it doesn't involve harnessing stars in far-out galaxies and sending them through a warmhole in the middle of the Earth. |
Right, so I talk about what company I work for just to prove to you I've worked with wind. Right.
My point about profitability is that people will do what's profitable, and nobody is really into wind in any kind of way, there are a sprinkling of projects here and there, but mostly a PR motive, not a profit motive. You said people must find it profitable cause projects exist ... I'm saying their aren't many so many others can't find the profitability. Maybe not something you can understand, just get someone from the real world to help you out with that.
I get that fossil fuels are non-renewable, I get we have a problem, my point from the very start was not anti - green, as you so judged.
9By the way, is putting words in other peoples mouth a rare occurance or do you do that on a regular basis with people ... only way you can win an arguement in your mind I suppose.) But that a solution will be hard ... wind is very localized and still not proving to be useful yet, solar is not economic by a mile so then what? as we take away, or tax fossil fuel consumption even more, or development projects; prices will go up, and the masses won't have it. Simple as that.
BTW, there is more than 100 years of fossil fuels around ... again something someone from the real world may be able to help you out with.