Jack: Reminds me of one little point about Von Braun... Before he was head hunted by the USA (as he wanted to be).... he was designing the V series of weapons. The intent in the end was to build ICBM's (V10) capable of bombing the east coast of the USA with a warhead that would probably been of nerve gas, or if the tech came together... nuclear.

Never mind that his ideas killed 1000's of UK citizens or that he knew his weapons were being built by slave labour, of which 20,000 died from the hellish treatment he received.

(V): Our motives are not always filled with good intentions But we should know better today. America used captured Nazi war criminals to develop it's jet engines as well as it's rocket motors. We uses Japanese war criminals to develop our bacterial and chemical weapons.
Our politicians glorify these actions instead of being ashamed of them.

Our methods are seldom filled with the good intentions we propagandize. It seems like we are doomed to keep making the same mistakes over and over at the high cost of innocent lives.

Jack: Our gov experimented with Anthrax on a little island off Scotland during WWII... In case the Germans went onto using chemical/biological weapons.

The island is still unsafe for human habitation, with any still remaining anthrax spores possibly active for 100's of years. It has been officially cleared as 'safe' after decontamination and the removal of topsoil. But people 'unofficially' consider it a place to avoid.

(V): I have little faith in governments that declare areas to be safe after they have created these disaster zones.

Even with radiation like the recent release in Japan the agencies responsible for putting out warnings just up the safe levels of radiation people can stand which is nothing but more support for corporations paying off government officials to keep their products moving.

Worldwide people have to stand up to corrupt officials and stop listening to mental cases like Beck, Limbaugh and Murdock.

Jack: Radiation is a tricky one, depends on what type (alpha/beta,etc) and what isotopes.

(V):<b> Their is no such thing as good exposure to radiation it all builds up in your body over time.

Our NRC just approved more nuclear power plants to be designed by GE one of the biggest corporate scam companies ever devised. We can't dispose of the nuclear waste we have now and they want to create more.

The world needs green energy not more corporate scams.

Jack: There is always present the natural background radiation. This is a low level field that we are use to and some suspect helps stimulate the immune system. Studies on people who live in areas with 4x the natural do not show extra related deaths.

Nuclear energy leaves much to be desired. While it is relatively clean, the waste does need burying in deep mines in special containers for a long long time.

At the moment we need a mix of energy supplies to be realistic. More green definitely, but until we have battery systems that can store green energy at a sufficient level, we need other sources.

(V):Yes we have to use other sources but nuclear is not one of them V. Their is to much corruption between the nuclear watchdogs and corporations and then like I said we cannot even handle the nuclear waste we have built up so far and we want to create more. I think that is very poor idea. I would like to see anyone prove the Japanese nuclear disaster does not have a negative impact on the world and it's food supply as well as the near future deaths it has and will cause as well as many birth defects. It's always the innocent people that get the bullet in the head.

Jack: Until we develop and install green energy sources.. we need current tech. There are pro's and con's with fossil and Nuclear. N' corruption seems at the moment to be higher in the fossil fuel business.

"like I said we cannot even handle the nuclear waste we have built up so far and we want to create more."

Yes we can... it is buried underground. Same as the way to deal with fossil fuel plant emissions of CO2 and actually make it 'clean'.

"I would like to see anyone prove the Japanese nuclear disaster does not have a negative impact on the world and it's food supply as well as the near future deaths it has and will cause as well as many birth defects."

It's a disaster, just like with a plane crashing, oil tanker/field leak. Compared to Chernobyl, or the 'accidents' elsewhere it's no way near the scale.

(V):"It's a disaster, just like with a plane crashing, oil tanker/field leak.
Compared to Chernobyl, or the 'accidents' elsewhere it's no way near
the scale."

This is not true radiation is nothing like these things. Radiation cannot be recovered and is just a disaster waiting to happen. You cannot bury nuclear wast underground permanently it's only out of sight until the containers deteriorate. Even France that depends almost entirely on nuclear power is starting to convert to other sources of energy.
Getting rid of nuclear waste is also a corporate scam that the taxpayers have to spend their money on to get rid of what these energy cons produce.

Your right V about American potential for green energy we have several good sources and need to start using then to their fullest.

Jack: Yes they are, just like every other European country. It's part of a concertive effort all within the EU to cut down on our dependence on fossil fuels and nuclear.

"This is not true radiation is nothing like these things. "

Toxicology wise, I believe it is true. If a tanker leaks it's crude oil into the environment it's effects can last for years or decades. Millions of gallons of escaped oil can create kill zones where nothing can live.

"Radiation cannot be recovered"

Yes it can, such efforts have been going on near the windscale nuclear plant for years.

(V):Yes radiation recovery continues but the effects on child birth defects and radiation caused cancers continue to rise. Their is no such thing ad acceptable radiation levers it is just another corporate backed scam. GE has already proven how unreliable their nuclear technology is and what lengths they will go to to buy off nuclear inspectors and then  their is also the long lasting effects on ground water when nuclear waste leaks into the ground.

Oil only creates dead zones like we have now in the Gulf because of the way energy cons like Hayward buys off politicians so they do not have to be responsible for the environmental damage they cause.

Green energy is the only cure for the environmental damage and climate change we are causing.

With the winter disaster being suffered by Europe this year I would think green technology would be a #1 issue.
 

Jack: Which is probably more due to all the nuclear weapons testing. The contaminants from those far outweigh all the radiation leaks that have occurred.

... over 2000 atomic and hydrogen bomb tests.

"what lengths they will go to to buy off nuclear inspectors"

Then that is a problem of human corruption. Just as much as the BP oil spill.

"winter disaster being suffered by Europe this year"

??? All I can say on that is compared to last year in the UK, this winter has been mild.

(V): Ha! We agree. But what are those other sources? I'm for fossil fuels until we have viable alternatives that are both affordable and efficient.

Artful Dodger: Clean fossil fuel power plants?

"are both affordable and efficient."

Renewable is. You guys in the USA have so much untapped power. Solar especially, California sits on a goldmine of geothermal.

(V): There really isn't any renewable energy source that at the moment can replace our fossil fuel needs. That is not to say that it isn't possible but we're a way off.

Fossil fuels can be harvested efficiently and cleanly. Until there is the necessary new technology that is affordable and more importantly, available in plenty, all this talk of green energy is just talk.

Artful Dodger: Oh yes there is. Wind, wave, solar, geothermal and now magnetic power amplifiers that produce more energy than inputted. The main problems seem to be the old companies being unwilling to give up their market share of the energy business and therefore creating alot of misinformation.

"Fossil fuels can be harvested efficiently and cleanly."

Most aren't though are they.


"Less than a week ago 106 mostly Conservative MPs wrote to the Prime Minister, urging cuts in public subsidies to UK windfarms, on the grounds that these towering turbines were neither efficient to run nor pleasing on the eye."

NIMBY's aka Not In My Back Yard. The conservatives are probably being pressed by those who are looking more out for their house prices than anything else.

eg..
"In the affluent English village of Ashtead, Surrey, which lies on the outside of London, residents objected in 2007[13] to the conversion of a large, £1.7 million residential property into a family support centre for relatives of wounded British service personnel. The house was to be purchased by a registered charity, SSAFA Forces Help.[14][15][16] Local residents objected to the proposal out of fear of increased traffic and noise, as well as the possibility of an increased threat of terrorism. They also contended that the SSAFA charity is actually a business, thereby setting an unwelcome precedent.[17] Local newspapers ran articles titled "Nimby neighbours' war with wounded soldiers' families" and "No Heroes in my Backyard.""

(V): you can cite all the isolated green energy "successes" you want but that won't prove that the entire world can be sustained by these technologies. In fact, they can't. That's the science of it. Isolated example prove nothing.

Artful Dodger: Is that a reason to stop building more green energy supply systems... no.

At the moment we cannot supply the entire world. But some countries like Iceland have tapped into natural renewable energy.

"Five major geothermal power plants exist in Iceland, which produce approximately 26.2% (2010)[1] of the nation's energy. In addition, geothermal heating meets the heating and hot water requirements of approximately 87% of all buildings in Iceland. Apart from geothermal energy, 73.8% of the nation’s electricity was generated by hydro power, and 0.1% from fossil fuels."

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

Is that an isolated example, or just a country willing to use 'free' energy.

"In the meantime, we need to drill, drill, drill"

And when the price goes through the roof, what then? A Mad Max type scenerio!!

"I'll bet good money you use fossil fuels all the time."

..because we are still reliant on power plants built decades ago, and still in the process of building green systems. But there are (I've just read) some suppliers in the UK who invest the profits into more green energy. One supplier states that at the present over 50% of the energy they supply comes from green sources. That is a big difference compared to the big 6 energy companies in the UK, who's reputation at the moment is very bad.

After looking at the differences between them and the big 6.. it looks like a good deal. Even better then the non profit company we currently use.

(V):

"Artful Dodger: Is that a reason to stop building more green energy supply systems... no."

But WHO said anything about stopping?
I don't recall anyone suggesting THAT.

I'm sure everyone (except possibly the oil companies) would prefer that SOME day we ARE at that point. But we aren't yet.
There has to be a reasonable way to reach that point. But stopping using fossil fuels all at once certainly won't get us there either.

rod03801:

But WHO said anything about stopping all at once?
I don't recall anyone suggesting THAT.

(V): Answering a question with a question? Fun!

rod03801: Yes.

(V): So, you don't know the answer to the question.

rod03801: Is there a point to the question?

(V): It's not that complicated. You enjoy arguing, for arguing sake. The quote explains the question. You made the statement as though someone else had used the statement as some sort of fact, yet no one had even said it. It's just the way you love going round and round and round.

rod03801: Oh no I didn't. you just presumed I did.

"You enjoy arguing, for arguing sake."

Yes you do.

(V): The answer is using more green technology that will ween us off the oil glut. Also not listening to corporate lobby groups that support nothing but propaganda on climate change for their own personal profits.

Jack: Like free solar powered electric car recharging points.

"Also not listening to corporate lobby groups that support nothing but propaganda on climate change for their own personal profits."

unlikely.. too many politicians rely on the extra cash to feed their greedy lifestyles.

(V): True but we are in the process of creating a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood as well as stop insider trading with congress and the supreme court.

These career politicians have all become pigs feeding at the troth.

The supreme court needs to be put under our conflict of interest laws.

(V):<b> Walmart is rebuilding their store roofs to put solar power on them to operate their stores and sell the excess back to the power companies.

Some people are buying Chevy Volts and putting solar panels on their roofs to recharge them and they can sell the excess to the power companies except in California. They have a law against selling excess energy to power companies.

rod03801: "But WHO said anything about stopping?
I don't recall anyone suggesting THAT"


This is how the radicals think. They don't listen to what you say and they always use a straw man in their arguments.

Where renewable energy technology is successful, fine. Build away. But how many BILLIONS must we waste? We've recently seen the waste. Enough. Get back to the drawing board and figure it out.

Chevy Volt. classic example of a waste. Like Obama: Lots of hype but no spark.

(V): Wrong again Jules. We've wasted millions because the technology isn't there yet. We need to work on the technology and THEN build. Right now you are in favor of building an airplane that simply CAN'T fly.

(V): "Five major geothermal power plants exist in Iceland, which produce approximately 26.2% (2010

Great, and the other 74%....they all are freezing to death.

Artful Dodger:

"Five major geothermal power plants exist in Iceland, which produce
approximately 26.2% (2010)[1] of the nation's energy. In addition,
geothermal heating meets the heating and hot water requirements of
approximately 87% of all buildings in Iceland. Apart from geothermal
energy, 73.8% of the nation’s electricity was generated by hydro power,
and 0.1% from fossil fuels."

... you seemed to miss that part, so I've made it clearer.

(V): Wrong again. I didn't miss anything. We have the same here in the US but it's only a very SMALL portion of the US energy needs. AND you are limited as to where you can build those plants. Either way, they won't meet the worlds needs. Just a small population. It's isolated.

Artful Dodger: Yes, the position of 'hot spots' limits where geothermal can be used.

"Either way, they won't meet the worlds needs."

As part of the whole package of renewable energy, it in areas of good heat locality (eg Yellowstone park) you have a great potential.

"Just a small population. It's isolated."

Quite a bit of the population of the world lives near volcanoes and/or tectonic plates.

(V): you can cite all the isolated green energy "successes" you want but that won't prove that the entire world can be sustained by these technologies. In fact, they can't. That's the science of it. Isolated example prove nothing.

"As predicted was inevitable, today the Spanish newspaper La Gaceta runs with a full-page article fessing up to the truth about Spain’s “green jobs” boondoggle, which happens to be the one naively cited by President Obama no less than eight times as his model for the United States. It is now out there as a bust, a costly disaster that has come undone in Spain to the point that even the Socialists admit it, with the media now in full pursuit....his is now an explosive scandal in Spain, coming on the heels of shabby treatment over there in payback to an academic team for having pointed the disaster out (joined by equally shabby treatment by the Obama administration).

I’d say “I hate to say I told you so,” but I revel in it. My only regret is that they couldn’t have admitted it about three weeks ago to coincide even more perfectly with the release of Power Grab: How Obama’s Green Policies Will Steal Your Freedom and Bankrupt America. In the book, I detail the folly of Obama’s claims about European “green economy” miracles and what cramming them down here means for you, unless you stand up and fight back now.

The man who exposed the disaster, Dr. Gabriel Calzada, kindly praises the dissection of “free ice cream” “green jobs” economics on the jacket. That fight begins anew next week with the likely Senate vote on S.J. Res. 26, the Murkowski resolution to disapprove of the Environmental Protection Agency’s attempt to impose much of this agenda through the regulatory back door without Congress ever having authorized such an enormous economic intervention. Read Power Grab to get your head around the numerous fallacies and fabrications, and give Washington hell."

I'll bet good money you use fossil fuels all the time. Why is that Jules?

(V): "Wind, wave, solar, geothermal and now magnetic power amplifiers that produce more energy than inputted."

Produce more energy than input?????
Which journal did you read that in? Thought they had stopped publishing the 'Sunday Sport' :)

SL-Mark: Actually I caught glimpses of it through my science subscription choices on youtube. It's through using neodymium magnets. The same ones used in wind turbines.

(V): Guess you are talking about magnetic motors. Sorry, they don't work and certainly don't give free energy.

Neodymium magnets are very widely used, not just in wind turbines. Your computer hard drive probably uses them too! There is no magic in these magnets, only a strong magnetic field.

SL-Mark: Seem there is some disagreement over that. Plus more out than in is not free, just a reduction. If you get 300% more out then that is a good thing. Nuclear power is not 'free' energy, it consumes power, but creates more just as with all our present systems. Even green takes some power to create the collection devices.

"Your computer hard drive probably uses them too!"

Yes they do. Even might take my unused one apart to have a look at them.

"There is no magic in these magnets, only a strong magnetic field."

I didn't say it was magic, just the application of science.