Al Gore slams the tories' new environmental plan!

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by sadora

Right. Because apathy is a much better answer.

Umm...maybe you missed the message.

Here it is....

It is easy to come up with ideas. A whole lot harder to actually implement them (i.e. make it actually work) and be responsible for the consequences of those actions.

It is so much easier to be the 31K Gores and Deisel Suzukis of this world. Live in massive mansionS!!!!, profit greatly from eviromentalism and look down upon us unwashed and tell us to shape up.

[sadora]

Originally Posted by HOZ

It is easy to come up with ideas. A whole lot harder to actually implement them (i.e. make it actually work) and be responsible for the consequences of those actions.

Where it's also easy not to do anything at all, except that these consequences could have a more damaging affect.

[Lurch]

The energy contained in oil is not used efficiently. If oil was used to create electricity rather than running a combustion engine, the energy outout increases by a factor of 16,000. If we can shift to electric vehicles we can see an immediate return on our investment. Of course that hurts the oil companies as well as the auto manufactures, two of the most powerful lobbies in politics today, which is why the government does not encourage the change.

I actually agree with most of your rant Lanny, but this is so far off base I cannot imagine where you got it from. Combustion engines are about 20% to 25% efficient, and electricity turbines 40% to 55% efficient. Subtract line losses, inefficiencies converting electricity back to chemical energy in a battery, and you are probably 40% efficient or worse. Basically, the increase in efficiency is 2:1 at best.

[Flame On]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Umm...maybe you missed the message.

Here it is....

It is easy to come up with ideas. A whole lot harder to actually implement them (i.e. make it actually work) and be responsible for the consequences of those actions.

It is so much easier to be the 31K Gores and Deisel Suzukis of this world. Live in massive mansionS!!!!, profit greatly from eviromentalism and look down upon us unwashed and tell us to shape up.

All that means is those people; if we're to believe what you say, are hypocrits. That doesn't change the dangers faced, or the need to address them effectively.
Easy to sit in your moms house and pick holes in the arguments of those wanting change and use it as a crutch to do nothing.

[HOZ]

Originally Posted by Flame On

All that means is those people; if we're to believe what you say, are hypocrits. That doesn't change the dangers faced, or the need to address them effectively.
Easy to sit in your moms house and pick holes in the arguments of those wanting change and use it as a crutch to do nothing.

It is easy to pick holes in their arguments because they are based on inaccuracies and hysteria. DOOM< DOOM< DOOM!!! If you don't do anything we are all going to DIE< DIE< DIE!!!! Beat it like a drum. Lead by hypocrits that live off it. This is Y2K all over again.

Always nice to polute less but it will hardly stop a mostly natural phenomena.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by HOZ

Gotta love the "IDEA" factories.

Originally Posted by HOZ

We need to be leaders....
innovaters...
lead the world...
designers....
creators...
active....
proactive....


To all our cultural superiors, you keep coming up with these ideas! Leave the real thinking to others. Consequences and implimentation problems be damned!

More lame ass garbage from the guy who never ceases to come up with lame assed garbage. You don't like ideas because you never come up with any yourself. The last original thought you produced you flushed down the toilet minutes later, after a back to front wipe.

Just to shut you up, once and for all, here is exactly how communities can become greener without negatively impacting the economy.

The first and most important thing we have to do is start rethinking how we approach the concept of energy and transportation. We have to change our mindset from where we think of multiple energy standards to that of one energy standard. Our source of consumer “power” can be one stop shopping; that being electricity.

This power source is naturally occurring and can be generated in many different ways. If we can shift our focus to one source of energy to do everything, we have the ability to clean our atmosphere much easier. We move having to control hundreds of millions of points of pollution (cars, trucks, trains, house furnaces, factories, processing plants, etc.) to several thousand (the generator plants). Electricity can be used for any application. Heating, cooling, powering devices we use in our daily lives, and moving goods and people. Electricity has massive advantages over other sources of power.

The biggest knock against hydrogen fuel cell vehicles is that they will require either a completely new infrastructure or a retrofit of existing facilities. Electricity does not suffer from this problem as the delivery infrastructure already exists. Clean power is delivered to pretty well every home built today. There are very few places in North America that electric power is not available and not the primary source of energy. This infrastructure gives electric power a massive advantage over any other potential source of power out there as there is no significant infrastructure delivery system required.

What is really cool about electric power as a standard is that communities CAN be built as self-sufficient entities. Through the use of existing technologies, communities can be built that would allow the citizens who live there to generate all of the power they would require for their homes, for transportation, for community services, and still have excess power to sell back onto the grid for use in other applications. All it takes is some forward thinking. By designing communities that utilize solar power, wind power, biomass collection and conversion, and electric vehicles, the requirement to stay “on the grid” disappears. All aspects of home life and all transportation needs are met in a closed system. How does this work?

Communities are designed around a biomass collection facility that uses waste products to generate electricity. All wastes that leave homes arrive at this plant for processing in a closed system. All food wastes turn into power. Every time you take a dump, you’re flushing fuel down to the toilet that will be converted into power. Every time the grass is cut, fuel for power generation is created. This facility becomes the center of power generation for the community. But this facility is not overly taxed because each house in the community is roofed with an array of high efficiency solar cells that collect enough power during the day to meet or exceed the power needs of the dwelling. Any excess power is turned back to the grid and sold down stream, giving these homes the ability to pay for their water utility. The best part of this whole scenario is that transportation costs are almost eliminated. Out side of the investment in your electric vehicle, the cost of fuel is covered through your community power generation. There is no extra cost for fuel consumption.

This sounds somewhat Utopian, and in some ways it is, but the bottom line is that this is real and the technology is available today. What is missing is the incentive to create such communities.

There are going to be those who are going to argue that there are certain aspects of our society that we cannot address with “electric” power. That is true, there are going to be some modes of transportation (air travel, shipping and freight are examples that some will throw out there as road blocks) that electric power are going to be very hard to address with our current state of technology. But that too can change.

Freight can still be moved across the country by rail. Electric train engines are just as powerful and even more energy efficient than the diesel counterpart. This retrofit to the existing rail system would be simple and quite cost effective.

Shipping is likely to be considered a roadblock. Not so. Nuclear reactors have been powering the navy for quite some time. Pushing this technology to the commercial fleets of large freighters would drastically reduce their emissions and make our products cheaper in the long run, as these ships would only have to refuel every 40-50 years.

There are still going to be certain aspects of transportation that will require the use of fossil fuels. Until plasma engines become commercially available, air travel will still rely on kerosene. Trucking will still rely on diesel, but bio-diesel instead, reducing emissions (I work with a guy who is already running a bio-diesel Passat and loving it). There will still be emissions from these entities into the atmosphere, but the largest offenders (automobiles) will be long gone.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

So is this really possible? Yes, and here’s a rundown of the technologies that can bring this “idea” (oh, ideas are just so evil to some people) to life.

The Electric Car

This is the sexiest of the bunch. Yes indeedy, it is expensive, but the proof of concept always is. Tesla has already sold out their first production run and is close to selling out their second production run, which they haven’t even started! Demand is there already!!! Tesla is already working on their five person sedan model and hope to have it on the road for 2010.

http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

There are other options available, and more coming each day.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/01...ith-batteries/

Here's a crossover SUV that is ready to go. The minute I can find a North American distributor I will plunk down my cash on this baby (if Tesla or GM doesn’t beat them to the NA market).

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/02...or-the-most-pa

And from the guys who “killed the electric car” in the first place, here they are jumping back into the mix with a very cool looking prototype.

http://www.chevrolet.com/electriccar/

Okay, so the transportation angle for the average Joe is covered, but what about power generation? How can we really move to an electric standard for all of our power needs?

Biomass Power Generation

Biomass is great because it is just lying around doing nothing, and it is renewable. That's right, its the waste from grass clippings, from the chaff in farmers fields, from the highly flammable waste products that trees create in the forests and lead to forest fires, from the waste generated in lumber and paper production, and from animal wastes in our beef and dairy industries. The only costs associated with it are the collection, but that is nothing more than a change in practice. Most of this stuff is already collected but sent off to landfill to rot.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/...cal_power.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biomass/

This report proves that HOZ could be an endless supplier of power to the world. The bullcrap produced by HOZ could be used by this plant to power his community.

http://biomass.ucdavis.edu/pages/rep...ssessment.html

Closely related is Bio Gas. This is a great technology that takes advantage of our wasteful ways. Bio Gas technology collects the naturally occurring methane produced in landfills and uses that as fuel to generate electricity.

http://www.biogastech.com/

Coal Power Generation

This is very interesting technology, especially to Albertans who have massive coal deposits to exploit. Interestingly, Montana is a leader and key proponent to this technology. Coal has long been considered a big time problem for pollutants, but new technologies have been developed, and new storage proposals for wastes, have made coal a very promising fuel in electric power generation. The use of green technology in coal power generation is explained fully in this document.

http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/commissio...t_3-3-05cc.pdf

The technology in action

http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications.../tl_tampa.html

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/st...00645377&EDATE=

Here's a lawsuit just recently settled that forces this technology into action against one of the biggest creators of acid rain in Wisconsin.

http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resour...a/wepco-fs.pdf

Is this really true? Are these electric options "cleaner" than what we presently do? Don't you just transfer the polutants from tailpipe to smoke stack? No, and here's the math behind it.

http://drivingthefuture.com/97pct.htm

Nuclear Power

This technology has been around for years, and it is only getting better. Clean and safe, nuclear power only has to overcome the stigma associated with past accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. Interesting to note is the information contained that outlines the power output versus pollutant output.

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/

An interesting doc outlining cost savings.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear...learpower.html

Solar Power

Soalr power is a technology that everyone can use. If you have a roof pointing south, you have the ability to have a function solar array that can come close to meeting your home power needs. If you have a large roof, capable of handling a multi-panel array, you can exceed your needs and sell the extra power back onto the grid.

http://www.solarharvest.org/

http://www.sunwize.com/index.htm?utm...e+Technologies

http://www.solarelectricpower.org/

Prairie Grass Ethanol

This is a potential Genie in the bottle for North America. This is a native grass that grows almost anywhere, and stores vast amounts of energy. It requires no watering infrastructure and is exceptionally hardy, being able to withstand heat, cold, wet and dry conditions. Even during the dust bowl of the great depression this native grass thrived. At present, the major problem with this fuel source is cost to produce energy, but as with any technology, the more it is implemented and used, the cheaper it becomes.

http://wcco.com/local/local_story_022224523.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...53&ft=1&f=1019

Cane Sugar Ethanol

This is the technology that has made Brazil, a developing nation, energy self sufficient.

http://www.boston.com/business/artic...hanol_profits/

http://www.tifac.org.in/do/sug/case/economics.htm

Tidal Wave Power

Not a solution for all parts of the world, but coastal communities can supplement their power needs with this quickly developing technology.

http://www.fujitaresearch.com/reports/tidalpower.html

Wind Power

Another power source that we could use to harness the power of HOZ. Just let him stand in front of a bank of these giant windmills and watch the megawatts flow! Seriously, for anyone who has lived in, or visited, the Crowsnest Pass or the Lethbridge area, you know just how much power there could be harnessed from the wind. These large windmills can be erected anywhere and used to supplement the power on the community grid.

http://www.windenergy.com/index_wind.htm

http://www.natwindpower.co.uk/homepage/index.asp

Here are average Joes doing their part using Wind Power.

http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind.html

Bio Diesel

As I mentioned earlier, I work with a fellow already using this technology to his advantage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bio_fuel

http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Geothermal Power

The earth is a very active place and generates unbelievable amounts of heat that is released into the atmosphere each day. This release of heat can easily be harnessed and converted into electrical power.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/powerplants.html

Here’s a link to Alberta’s next door neighbors using this technology.

http://www.montanagreenpower.com/ren...mal/index.html


The problem with implementing solutions like these are all cultural. We presently don’t think in this fashion. The concept of a cycle just doesn’t dawn on many people. They think that consumption is a linear process and cannot be more of a cycle that is self-sustaining. As a society, we have ceased to think about using all the resources of something we harvest. We used to have this mindset, but we stopped doing it for some reason. Mass production and even greater consumption has shut down the part of our brains that drove us to use every part of anything that was harvested. We have become a culture of waste. We don’t have to be that way.

Who can drive these initiatives? We all can. We can make demands on manufacturers to provide the products we desire. We can force the builders to start using better materials and incorporate these energy producing products. We can demand that new communities and developments use this energy self-sufficiency design. We can demand of our government that they reward those industries and individuals that become green with tax credits equal to the dollars invested in these technologies. We have the power to make these existing technologies become the new power standard and lead to a cleaner environment for our grand children. All it takes it some effort on our part.

[mykalberta]

From someone who was Vice President of another country and did absolutely nothing for the environment that comes close to this, he should shut his damn mouth and cross the border and take his a$$ back to Yankee Doodle fricken Dandy.

Correct that, him and Bono should dance around a camp fire singing koombaya and whining about the environment and Africa.

Pahlease.

MYK

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

From someone who was Vice President of another country and did absolutely nothing for the environment that comes close to this, he should shut his damn mouth and cross the border and take his a$$ back to Yankee Doodle fricken Dandy.

Correct that, him and Bono should dance around a camp fire singing koombaya and whining about the environment and Africa.

Pahlease.

MYK

How about just shutting your damned mouth? Between you and HOZ, you two make Canadians look less intelligent than the red neck idiots down here that support Bush. Try speaking to the issue for a change and creating an argument based on some facts.

[sadora]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

From someone who was Vice President of another country and did absolutely nothing for the environment that comes close to this, he should shut his damn mouth and cross the border and take his a$$ back to Yankee Doodle fricken Dandy.

Correct that, him and Bono should dance around a camp fire singing koombaya and whining about the environment and Africa.

Pahlease.

MYK

I'm sorry but that's just ignorant.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

How about just shutting your damned mouth? Between you and HOZ, you two make Canadians look less intelligent than the red neck idiots down here that support Bush. Try speaking to the issue for a change and creating an argument based on some facts.

I am sorry if I am not some apologetic Liberal kiss a$$ who wish we were more like Europe and have some castrated sense of duty makes me sick.

And what exactly did you two favorite bed monkeys Gore and Clinton do for the enviro when they were in office?

Thats right NOTHING. They didnt even have the balls to send Kyoto to Congress and they did NOTHING that comes close to this. What, no smarter than thou everyone who believes in Religion is an idiot comment for that?

Go back to wearing berkinstocks and not showering while collecting EI and whining about how people should pay more taxes.

MYK

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

I am sorry if I am not some apologetic Liberal kiss a$$ who wish we were more like Europe and have some castrated sense of duty makes me sick.

Yes, well at least the rest of us can proudly say that our parents are not brother and sister. Must be great for you to be able to hold your family reunion in a phonebooth!

You are going to have to do a lot better than than, mouth breather. Having a feeling of social responsibility toward your fellow man, and the planet which we inhabit, does not make you liberal, it makes you evolved. When you can take a step back and understand that the actions your species are having a negative impact on the biosphere, and that you believe your actions can reverse the damage done to this point, that puts you on a level above the dumb animals who survive on instinct. Failure to acknowledge this responsibility precludes you from that group, and places you in the lower group.

And what exactly did you two favorite bed monkeys Gore and Clinton do for the enviro when they were in office?

Thats right NOTHING. They didnt even have the balls to send Kyoto to Congress and they did NOTHING that comes close to this. What, no smarter than thou everyone who believes in Religion is an idiot comment for that?

If you're proof of what religion can do for someone, its time to finally ban the practice.

You also need a little lesson in history pal. Clinton actually left a substantial legacy when it comes to the enviroment. Even though Clinton had to fight the Republican dominated congress, and many State legislatures that were at the time fighting against federal laws (the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Endangered Species Act).

Clinton ended up establishing 22 national monuments which included some six million acres. In addition there were 42 wildlife refuges created. In addition, Charles Levendosky reminds us there were also 84 million acres underwater set aside in the Hawaiian Islands. This has made him the president who preserved more land in national monuments in the lower 48 states than another other president since Theodore Roosevelt. In addition, Clinton protected more than 58 million acres of forest land in 39 different states by banning the building of roads protecting this forest land from development. Clinton was also able to increase protective regulations over air and water, as well as restrict mining and grazing on public lands, allowing him to claim partial victories over some of the same environmental battles he had lost in his first term.

Go back to wearing berkinstocks and not showering while collecting EI and whining about how people should pay more taxes.

MYK

Where in any of the information posted here does it say anyone should PAY more taxes? In fact, I proposed that people should get tax relief for being green and switching to more environmentally friendly solutions to energy and transportation. In fact, that was the only government involvement in any of the plans I suggested. Now was that too difficult for you to comprehend? This isn't rocket science. It's using existing technology to do something we should already be doing, looking after our own back yard. And what's really ironic, you're crying about an enterprise that would GUARANTEE you more money in your pocket. No utility bills, no gas payments, and the potential of selling your excess energy back onto the grid. And all of that is a bad thing. Very short sighted from a very small minded indiviual.

Now, do everyone a favor and stay the hell off your sister. We don't want your genes spreading any further than they already have.

[Flame On]

You don't shower Lanny?! But....how did he know that?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Flame On

You don't shower Lanny?! But....how did he know that?

Isn't it obvious? Birkenstocks are too slippery in the shower.

[The Unabomber]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

I don't think anyone is placing much faith in what "Gore" has to say, but is instead placing faith in the science that is being represented. Gore, BTW, has been doing this (similar) presentation for years. This is something that he has been very active in talking about and getting people to listen to. I think this is the reasn why he will not go back into politics. He understands that politics requires lawmakers to make decisions based on issues of the day, not long term problems. Global Warming is a long term problem than needs resolving and trying to do so in office would be next to impossible. You would need executive mandates to make many of these initiatives work, and that would require those mandates to transend persidential terms. Because of the bipolar situation in American politics, that is unlikely to happen. As sad as it is, it is easier to generate the change by going door-to-door than it is through government. If a ground swell of support in the zeitgeist can be developed, that can put the pressure on politicians to do more than pay lip service to the problem. Frankly, in corporate run America, the only way these problems are going to be changed is through consumer demand and corporations engaging the issues. Gore will have more impact by staying out of politics and communicating the issues to the world, having the people cast their votes with their dollars and spending habits.

I see that you sat that global warming is a long term problem, what you forgot to add Lanny is that it needs to be fixed in a short period of time. I don't like Al Gore but i don't dislike him either, but he is a politician at heart and that's the end of it. If he had the balls to do anything while in office as VP he would have, the problem with that is he would have lost all the votes from the oil and gas sector which would include auto workers union, this he couldn't have done.

If these people want to preach about global warming and how easy it is to fix then why don't they start at the top, they have the technology for electric/solar power cars, why doesn't mister Gore do something about that? See, once big business buys into global warming and fixing it then it will trickle down to the consumer, but until they do something about it then it's not a topic worth talking about. The oil and gas companies are the ones with the power to make a change, i don't forsee this happening in North America for a long time.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

I see that you sat that global warming is a long term problem, what you forgot to add Lanny is that it needs to be fixed in a short period of time. I don't like Al Gore but i don't dislike him either, but he is a politician at heart and that's the end of it. If he had the balls to do anything while in office as VP he would have, the problem with that is he would have lost all the votes from the oil and gas sector which would include auto workers union, this he couldn't have done.

Interestingly, this is the answer to the question you pose below;

If these people want to preach about global warming and how easy it is to fix then why don't they start at the top, they have the technology for electric/solar power cars, why doesn't mister Gore do something about that? See, once big business buys into global warming and fixing it then it will trickle down to the consumer, but until they do something about it then it's not a topic worth talking about. The oil and gas companies are the ones with the power to make a change, i don't forsee this happening in North America for a long time.

Seems to me that the fact that he's doing something now makes him a lot 'better' than the thousands of wealthy/powerful politicians in the US doing nothing (which, I grant, he used to be). Dick Cheney is the VP now... why doesn't he do something?

[Azure]

And just a few month ago, there were numerous articles saying of how NOTHING we could do, in the foreseeable future would fix this problem we have.

Remember Unabomber, when you are in the position Gore is in, you can afford to take one side of the issue and run with it. But when you're in office, you have to look at all sides of the issue, and make a decision.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Seems to me that the fact that he's doing something now makes him a lot 'better' than the thousands of wealthy/powerful politicians in the US doing nothing (which, I grant, he used to be). Dick Cheney is the VP now... why doesn't he do something?

We all know that the current administration is a tad bit 'useless' when it comes to doing something, but the US HAS lowered their emissions more than Canada.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by The Unabomber

I see that you sat that global warming is a long term problem, what you forgot to add Lanny is that it needs to be fixed in a short period of time. I don't like Al Gore but i don't dislike him either, but he is a politician at heart and that's the end of it. If he had the balls to do anything while in office as VP he would have, the problem with that is he would have lost all the votes from the oil and gas sector which would include auto workers union, this he couldn't have done.

If these people want to preach about global warming and how easy it is to fix then why don't they start at the top, they have the technology for electric/solar power cars, why doesn't mister Gore do something about that? See, once big business buys into global warming and fixing it then it will trickle down to the consumer, but until they do something about it then it's not a topic worth talking about. The oil and gas companies are the ones with the power to make a change, i don't forsee this happening in North America for a long time.

I agree with what you are saying, but you ahve to realize that for the most part, the Vice President has zero power while in office. In fact, without congress, the President has his hands tied for the most part. This is what is completely lost on people when they try to comprehend the accomplishments of given Presidents. Bush got a lot of what he wanted, because he had party control over the house and the senate. Now that the house and senate are controlled by the Democrats, Bush will get nothing accomplished. He is too adversarial and will be at loggerheads with Congress. Conversely, Clinton was in the opposite situation, working against a Republican controlled house and senate and still managed to get his agenda completed by working with the GOP. Those are just two examples of how politics work in this country and how they can tie the hands of those in power. Getting back to Gore, he really had nothing to do with setting policy or pushing forward an agenda. To be honest, he had more power working in congress than he did as VP. Saying he was ineffective as VP is just wrong, as not many VP's have had opportunity to do much while in office.