mountainhiker

To quote the old adage, "if something seems too good to be true, it probably is." Certainly true in this case! :rolleyes:

Yep, 5 people hardly makes the grade as a valid sample. However, on a "green" blog I suspect the results will stay the same.

The one from the Australian gov will not load, must have removed it.

I guess one question is how much of the current city will they have to destroy to produce those nice looking green spaces. :rolleyes:

I don't recall Jesus ever saying anything like that and it is not listed as the 11th commandment. Wonder which bible they are reading out of? :sceptical:

Concept is good from the standpoint it should make people think! Will it change anyone ? :sceptical: Due to the lack of comparisons and as you point out the issues of max/low points will leave some wondering.

Yeah, I am thinking even less than 5% given the population size. At 2-3% you have to wonder who will suffer from this.

Think I would have to find out more about this project! Right now it sounds like one of the "feel good" projects that has little practical value in the long run as far as the environment goes.... :sceptical:

Given the limited number of solar panels on that, I suspect the payback on this project will never bee seen!

Thats what it appears, but the way it is weighted, you would have to be living in a tent on a farm (organic) and buying carbon credits. Think they started out with a good idea and got a little carried away....

The problem is you switched subjects, oil so that people can drive cars etc, to energy for heating etc. Since Vaxjo is in the middle of forests it made sense for them to use what was staring them in the face. Do other cities need to learn from that, yes. Most of the others are not living in the middle of a forest so they are going to have to be more creative and invest in other types of energy. Solar may be a more universal source for many. So, once again, we need to be investing in the research to produce alternatives that can be applied NOW. Alternatives to using gas as a source of energy for cars with totally new designs than what you see coming from the world auto makers. New ideas for cars

Well, I scored a 73 but I think it helps that I live in the mountains in a house built in the last 3 years designed for low cost to maintain, have a well and work out of my house.

I think the bottom line is No one is going to say NO until they have a alternative (cheaper) all countries are in the same boat as the US. they need oil to keep their standards of living, not really an option until the alternative is in place...

True, however, the biggest part of the world, China/India etc is saying YES to oil. At least Europe and the US/Canada are working on alternatives. The key has to be to get the alternatives cheaper than oil. No one is going to say NO until they have a alternative (cheaper)

So, you're saying that regulations do not matter much? Nope, not what I am saying at all, we need all the regulations that we have in place. You're saying that the fair and competitive market place will solve problems? No, hardly a fair and competitive market place If the solar power takes off, then the oil industry will stop creating so many problems No, how ever you do have to admit that competition will create a more level playing field that will force the industry to change its ways. What I am saying is that trying to blame all the worlds troubles on the oil industry is not the solution. Trying to portray the oil industry as "evil" is not the solution. We are going to need/use oil until we can produce an array of alternate solutions, so, that is what we need to be working on. In the meantime, we have to face the fact that we need oil.

From what I have seen of that industry I would say that is not really true. Lots of hard work and constant research costs. At this time, we can't stop using oil so, until that time comes, we need to do a better job of getting it out of the ground with less damage to the environment. At the same time, we need to start spending more on solar cell research. We have got to get the cost of converting solar energy down to the point that it make common sense to build homes that get most of their energy from the sun. Throwing rocks at the oil industries is not the solution to the problem. :thoughtful:

Here in the US, the middle is not too bad of a place, but to be correct, you would also have to add "Ultra Left" to that list. Oh, yeah, now we have the "change" sub party inside the Democratic party, they are going to Change everything on a world wide basis, can't say what they are going to change and what the changes will be but they stand for Change. :thoughtful:

But, they are burning cleaner coal, well, at least that is the story. And they are offsetting it with "credits" (read scam) If they want to offset something they need to spend money on sun/wind power :thoughtful:

Just a little fastser

You mean this one? I think they should use both for max effect.....

This is what is needed to run from Argentina to Canada :thoughtful:

The trend is to look to a combination of diesel and gas/diesel/battery powered cars that use even less fuel. If some of the current research pays off, expect to see totally electric cars for commuters. Don't do much if you have to tow something, but for the mass that drives in to a office each day, big savings.

True, however, illegal immigration is a major downside in creating a wealthy society. When you have undocumented aliens as the US and Canada, they consume resources without contributing taxes to the system. Services, ie, medical etc suffer since they are treating people who are not contributors to the system. Also, since they are undocumented, it is very hard for the system to determine if they are being served.

The problem is that is an apples to oranges comparison. Take Finland, they do not have the number of illegal aliens (%) that the US or Canada does. Skews the numbers. In other words they are trying to justify taxing the crap out of the people using an invalid comparison. When I was in school, I was on the debate team and one of our books was "How To Lie with Numbers". Example would be if I have 10 things to make a comparison on, I only choose the ones that line up with what I am trying to prove, even if it only 1 out of the 10 is in my favor. If they don't mention the other 9 points that prove the opposite, is that really lying?

The problem is not that he is un-know, the problem is that he is too well know as a fringe runner. Sort of like a horse race. If this is the 20th race a horse has been in and it has never been any higher that last place, the 21st race, how many people are going to bet on it to win? That is Nader!