• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Gas prices soon to be $3.00 / gallon

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: conjur
Oh?

Who's to say those percentages can't change?
The laws of physics.

Energy does not come out of nowhere. Oil is the stored energy of sunlight captured by plants millions of years ago. All other forms of energy (except nuclear and hydro) require that we expend more energy in its creation than we can recapture. Net gain negative.

I've often noticed that the leftist side of the energy debate tends to have some whacky and completely unscientific ideas. Things like electric cars don't use fossil fuels or lead to pollution (apparently electricity out of the wall sockets is created by magic), that we can recapture more energy in the form of hydrogen than we expend in the process of electrolysis extracting the hydrogen from the water, and that hybrid cars run on some type of power other than gasoline (apparently the electrical power in the batteries comes from magic and not from the generator powered by the gasoline engine).
Ridiculous sh!t like that. Then they like to argue that jacking the price of oil to obsence heights will somehow force these "alternative" energies. Ignorance.

There are only TWO forms of capturable energy on the planet. The sun and the earth itself. Solar (still not cost effective), geothermal (the mass of the earth itself creates heat and pressure within it), hydropower (essentially solar), nuclear (essentially solar, all heavy atoms are created inside stars), and biological/argricultural (which was what oil essentially is, but from millions of years ago). Our best hope for an alternative to oil is to GROW our fuels (vegetable oils and alcohol) and to recycle our used biomass (ConAgra has turned this into very promising technology).
But lefties don't like that because it's not clean enough ("hydrogen burns clean") and so they have us chasing fantasies.
Am I wrong to think that this can in great part be solved by all the anti-nuclear nuts shutting the hell up and moving far more of the power grid to nuclear? That way we can get plenty of easy electricity and extract our pure hydrogen with it.

yup, nukes good. enviromentalists are bad. they do nothing but obstruct because they work from the assumption we shouldn't exist as we are plague upon mother earth so they won't work for any real solutions. like with housing... high density housing = good for enviroment as high density cities reduces need for private transport..makes public transport effective. but enviromentalists are against building buildings😛 or increasing population in their dear little towns. just results in urban sprawl. urban sprawl is also bad for the enviroment..but they won't do anything about it either. so population increase is just a problem to be ignored apparently. they won't come out against immigration either (sierra club) even when it obviously meshes with their idea that more humans = bad for enviroment. 2 billion dollar strong special interest group of a buncha f*ckheads
 
Back
Top