mountainhiker

Oh, yeah, "spend enough money" and you can accomplish anything. However, in the real world, you are NOT going to get anyone to pop unlimited money to build nuclear plants, which is why you have to take a more realistic approach.

There has NEVER been a nuclear plant build "reasonably speedy" or anywhere close to budget. I suspect you must own stock in this area! <_<

You have to wonder if that is not where this new car came from? Clearly a car that fits the "single" driver mode is going to be in demand with higher gas prices. Now that Italy's Fiat is taking an initial 35 percent stake in Chrysler, the market place is going to be changing rapidly this year and there is going to be room for new players.

However, in the right environment, intercity commuting, this would clearly have value.

You glossed over a key point that Simon made: nuclear cost is triple current rates! I realize that this will come as a shock to you but these are not really good economic times. If you think that in these times they are going to vote to only go with the most expensive solution to the problem, you need to get a grip on life. What you will see is people going for the best mix of solutions and for the time being, burning coal is one of them.

"environmentally-friendly" is not going to be the deciding issue, the answer is that we should be doing both. Solar makes sense in the West where they have more sunshine days and nuclear makes more sense in the east and northwest(more cloudy days). Geothermal energy is also is coming into play but you are not going to cut out the coal-burning plants anytime soon. The enviro-nuts in the US continue to preach against nuclear power. The enviro-nuts are at the far left of the environmental movement in the US and have never like nuclear power.

Somehow that sounds a little odd, considering how long the tree would have been out of the ground, I suspect the survival rate for the trees would not be very high? brettbh's composting sounds more productive.

In the real world, cheaper wins over environmentally-friendly. And it takes much less time and money to bring on-line solar, oh, yeah, for years every enviro-nut has been preaching against nuclear power so doubt you will get them to do an about face just because its more "environmentally-friendly". :lol:

So, how many people do you propose to kill off to solve this problem?

the one that produces the cheapest power (solar) and oh it sits in the middle of a desert so "wildlife" is not an issues here. The point is that in order for the switch to be made to more environmentally-friendly power, the cost had to come down to where it was on a par with coal etc. and now it has. Solar is always better than Nuclear and in this case I bet is much cheaper. :D

Solar Power for the same cost At least according to the calculations of one analyst, a 12.5 MW solar power system installed by First Solar for Sempra Generation produces electricity at a lower cost, without any subsidies, than conventional fossil fuel generated power. Mark Bachman, at Pacific Crest, concluded that the electricity from the First Solar system cost $0.075 per kilowatt hour to install, while conventional power cost $0.09 per kWh. Technology as finally got us were we need to be start switching to solar, now we need to implement it on a larger scale.

And you do make excellent points but: 1) Renewable energy provides us with some hope, but transitioning shall not be a speedy process (but, the current economic environment is speeding the process up) - this is true and the transition speed is different from country to country. I think it has been speeding up in the US due to the oil crisis and will see a jump after the election (maybe, if obama can overcome the democratic parties current do nothing attitude) 2) Governments (and people) are unwilling to make radical changes and people are unwilling to make radical changes and sacrifices. - Always have been and most likely always will. But the good news is that the perspective of "radical change" is in itself changing. Clearly solar and geothermal power are within the reach of the average person within the next few years due to advances in technology that have lowered the entry costs.

SO, I take that you agree that Hamas is wrong in their attitude of exterminating the Jews in Israel! :D

But is is so much safer to talk about environmentally-friendly coats for chihuahuas and eco-beer! The problem with population control as a serious topic, is that many of the areas where it is the most serious issue, are populated by non environmentally-friendly people who will scream racism at the very suggestion.

Maybe if you were not so clearly anti-Semitic you would have read the articles that you linked to and found that the article was not as one sided as you imply. Amazing that you totally ignore the fact that hamas is not honoring the cease fire.

1. Not politically correct subject 2. Teach people what causes babies since they clearly have not figured it out!

And look where talking out of both sides of his mouth got him So far hamas has been pretty blind but we will see how well they stick to this next ceasefire and if they start shooting the minute they decide it is over. As long as they refuse to change their attitude, it does not matter how much effort the other side puts into it and trying to blame the "West" only goes so far. At some point hamas has to come to the same table.

Both automakers are set to come out of the current economic situation in good shape just because of models like these. Ford is going to be the winner along with Toyota and Honda in the US market. Ford is set to bring in the cars it is selling in Europe. Chrysler is in talks to sell assets to Renault-Nissan since just one of Toyota's models outsold Chrysler's entire passenger car line(not a good sign). Regardless of where you are in the world, the world of autos is going to change in 2009. I own a Toyota myself, GM and Chrysler cannot compete on MPG and quality with Toyota! B)

However, at this point the UN should step in between hamas and Israel, enforce a ceasefire and pull both sides to the negotiating table to hammer out a deal which can lead to lasting peace in theory. Only then will they realize that to "enforce a ceasefire" they will have to kill off enough of hamas that they will no longer be a threat. B)

Have to agree with you on both points. That site does have some interesting points, however, seriously doubt that people will really stay longer on a site that has a "green" sticker on it. The rule on the web is still "content, content, content" followed by ease of use. These days people are more concerned about other issues than browsing only green sites. The government is going to have to carry the ball on forcing some key industries, ie auto, to get their act together.

Excellent points and I think a key is the willingness to accept that Israel has a right to exist. And you have to stop pretending that the people that live in Gaza and the Hamas are the same. They are not. Hamas was and is a terroist organization that must be delt with as step one to any peace plan. You cannot allow them to continue with the rocket attacks and expect any peace process to work.

Two different things, it may have been the warmest year since 1850 BUT, Russia is saying that the WINTER is colder and based on some strange data, they think it indicates an ice age! Instead of trying to shut down any discussion on the issue, I think it is worth looking at what these speculations and see if they are smoke and mirrors are is there something to it? :rolleyes:

That is true! Here in the US it may change from year to year even if the government does not change....

However, the bottom line Google isn't any worse than any other data centre operator

Russia declares that the earth is on the birnk of an Iceage! As if things were not strange enough now we have Russia tossing the idea into the "Global Warming" that we are heading into a new ice age. It now appears that the current Northern Hemisphere winter of 2008/09 will probably equal or surpass the winter of 2007/08 for both snow depth and cold temperatures. If this is true, we are looking at a major reshuffling of theories that are in total conflict. The article make for interesting reading.... <_<