On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 14:54:34 -0800, "Politically Incorrect"
<billmaher@tastelessjokes.org> wrote:

"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:a6dej3tscb69j41nikcbtbfvh9iv3gvilo@4ax.com...

On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 09:04:20 -0800, "Politically Incorrect"
<billmaher@tastelessjokes.org> wrote:

"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4733b614$0$16454$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

"Politically Incorrect" <billmaher@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in
message
news:demdnbWa5cOnB67anZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d@comcast.com...

"Jerry Okamura" <okamuraj005@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:473389d6$0$19621$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

"Politically Incorrect" <billmaher@tastelessjokes.org> wrote in
message
news:_vudnU_V8v9o-a7anZ2dnUVZ_uqvnZ2d@comcast.com...

"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:leb6j35endkuqsoj0jmpe4fc5sgn5krq7s@4ax.com...

Global-warming gases set to rise by 57% by 2030--IEA
Agence France-Presse
Last updated 08:42pm (Mla time) 11/07/2007

PARIS -- Emissions of greenhouse gases will rise by 57 percent by
2030
compared to current levels, leading to a rise in Earth's surface
temperature of at least three degrees Celsius (5.4 degrees
Fahrenheit), the International Energy Agency (IEA) said on
Wednesday.

all the more reason to convert to all electric vehicles and
electric
powered factories.

where do we get the electrical capacity for such a transition? why
nukes, of course.

you anti nuke people ready to change your minds for the sake of
fighting global warming?

Electrical power is only one part of the problem, in the first
place.
Second, electrical power is generated in some parts of the country,
using oil and coal, so if you convert ALL vehicles and factories to
be
powered by electricity, you would acutally increase the use of oil
and
coal, which constributes to greenhouse gases, it does not do the
opposite.

note that I suggested lots of nukes - no oil and gas used there

Which is only part of the problem......

I guess I'm missing the other part.

If we convert all automobiles to electric, if we convert all factories
to
all electric, if we convert all heating to electric, and we build the
nuclear power capacity to meet the demand, that eliminates just about
all
man made CO2 output, which is what the AGW crowd wants, isnt it? not to
mention the reduction of need for oil by some 50% (only half of oil goes
to
fuel - the rest goes to fertilizers and plastics and such)

the real frustrating thing about trying to talk to you and others like
you
is the total lack of any constructive thought. You spout your mantras,
but
when positive solutions are suggested you kick up your heels without
offering alternatives.

If... How many nuclear plants are slated to come online in the US in
the next 10 years?

none at all, given the current state of affairs. My point is that we need
to
develop a comprehensive plan, based on priorities, and then take action.
the
taking action is the hard part, given the opposition of the radical
environmentalists.

Exactly.

You must live in the real world.

Yes I must. The question is, do we want to solve a problem? If we do, then
what are the steps necessary to solve that problem?

The problem is not enough cheap energy. There is lots of Coal.

The AGW crowd, the radical environmental crowd, dont offer solutions. THAT
is the problem.

Here we agree.

--
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to
escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

"...the whole world, including the United States, including all that
we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark
Age, made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights
of perverted science." -- Sir Winston Churchill

Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net