Comments
1,012
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Badges
PeterW Santa Fe
Recent Posts
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
Chatter, I don't think it's a difficult problem to solve; it's only a matter of getting our priorities straight. Just as 1 example, 2/3 of all homes in the U.S. could have been converted to solar for the cost of the Iraq war, and that's paying outright for the entire capital investment, not using incentive based programs. Most of the U.S. is a giant geothermal heat sink. Check this out: http://edition.cnn .com/2009/TECH/sci ence/10/13/geother mal.resort/ This guy's invention generates electricity from geothermal energy in existing oil and gas wells, at temps of only 165 degrees, and 1 unit could power up to 250 homes. We should be drilling for heat instead of oil. And the desert Southwest is one massive solar energy resource. We should be constructing solar thermal plants as fast as we can. The technology is here today for solar generating architectural cladding (PV roofing/siding), and small, non-intrusive, "residential- friendly" wind turbines. All of the above, combined with improvements in efficiency and public transport, offers a pretty easy solution, and they can all be implemented rapidly. And the good thing about most applications of the above is that they can be localized, not needing long distance transmission lines. We should be building out this "infrastructu re" as rapidly as possible right now. We are going to need it very soon because when plug-in electric cars become more common they will wreak havoc with our grid. And in the near future this infrastructure can be used to generate hydrogen to power vehicles. If we don't achieve this, our economy is doomed. Whereas if we do the above we can reduce the cost of energy per GDP unit in our economy and thus remain globally competitive (the rest of the industrial world is already passing us by in this area). Unfortunately, I don't think there is good Chinese take-out in Santa Fe. I usually order from Chow's, but that's a little pricier than what I would consider to be "normal" for Chinese take-out. Sorry I can't be of more help! (Oct 15, 2009 | post #109)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
A. As if he is doing any of that . . . B. As if any of the above, even if they were true, would be enough to bring down America. cuckoo cuckoo (Oct 15, 2009 | post #54)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
I choose no such thing. The entire U.S. economy depends on energy. If we don't have secure and reasonably stable sources of energy, our economy will collapse. This is an undeniable fact, not something I choose. Any person of at least average intelligence should have no trouble understanding where their self-interest lies with regard to our energy model. Of course, I'm not surprised YOU don't understand. Everyone's lives, money, and property will be negatively impacted if we don't change our energy model soon. That's the trouble with you self-centered, me-firsters, you don't seem to understand that we all are impacted by issues like this, and that it will take the cooperation of us all to fix them. You trade your short-term selfish interests over our national security, economic stability, and even your own mid to long term interests, and apparently you're not even smart enough to realize that you're hosing yourself! LOL (Oct 15, 2009 | post #107)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
Actually because of regressive tax codes, I don't. I would be happy to pay more to fund the things we need to do to keep our country competitive in this century, because I'm not a greedy, self-centered, me-first child. I recognize that it is a priviledge to live and prosper in this country, and I believe that I owe a debt to my country and to my fellow man for that priviledge. I'm also smart enough to recognize that I benefit a great deal from programs that provide a reasonably stable society, an educated workforce, and an economic level playing field. It's called enlightened self-interest, you should look it up and try it sometime. All you me-firsters apparently aren't aware enough to recognize when you're shooting yourselves in your own feet, LOL! (Oct 14, 2009 | post #83)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
Well, in regard to the subject at hand, it means (and you have explicitly said) that you and your ilk don’t want to pay for the actions that our country must take to remain economically sound, namely, fixing our energy problemWhere do you get this garbage, don’t you know how your own government works? The people elect representatives, and they decide all of the above. DuhAgain, where are you getting this garbage? I’ve said none of the above. I hope you are having fun making up stuff to argue with yourself about, LOL! It does look a little odd though, so you might now want to do that in public so much. Get a grip, my man! (Oct 14, 2009 | post #77)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
MP, we will agree on most of the above. As far as how much tax is enough? That depends. America is presently faced with some great challenges. We must meet them if we are to remain economically strong into this century. We have to decide what needs to be done, then figure out the fairest way to pay for it. Taxes on the rich are the lowest they've been since the Hoover Administration, and the tax burden has shifted toward the middle class over the past few decades. I say it's high time the rich bear a burden proportional to the benefits they've reaped by living and doing business in this country. One of our biggest challenges is our mid to long term energy supply. It's a no-brainer that this is one of those "needs to be done" things. Forget global warming or CO2, if we don't change our energy model we are in for BIG, BIG trouble (and merely getting off foreign oil will not solve our problem becuase the oil market is a global one). These cap and trade schemes are intended to be market-based responses to the conservative "market-knows -best" mantra that's been hammered into the American political climate over the past few decades. It's pretty much impossible to enact a government program that proactively and directly changes our energy model because conservative ideology won't allow for it. So what would conservatives suggest to solve this problem? (Oct 14, 2009 | post #76)
City panel fine-tunes Railyard bond plan
Wasn't there at one time supposed to be a "sports/enter tainment" bar & grill opening in the Railyard? I thought I heard "ESPNzone ". What happened with that? (Oct 14, 2009 | post #10)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
What is Obama doing that you think will bring American and its principles to an end? (Oct 14, 2009 | post #36)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
You don't have to explain your position. We all get that you place your own personal prosperity over the long term economic and physical security of our country. And anyone who infers 'a desire to control other people' from a comment about the future economic viability of our country ought to consider whether they suffer from paranoid delusional disorder. Holy cow, what a ridiculous stretch! (Oct 14, 2009 | post #71)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
Rrrrriiight. Cuz telling someone they should move out of the country if they don't agree with you is NOT an ad hominen. Hahaha! Are you seriously such a hypocrite? And please show me anywhere in my comments where I referred to Democratic or Obama policies. Anywhere. You should try reading what I actually wrote, and commenting on that if you want, instead of just making stuff up. (Oct 14, 2009 | post #31)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
No it doesn't, unless one is completely clueless. (Oct 14, 2009 | post #28)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
Please explain how Japan's opinion on Obama's worthiness of the prize makes his winning it not an honor for our country. (Oct 14, 2009 | post #27)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
LOL! Apparently you don't understand much about measures of political support. A 53% to 39% favorable/unfavorable margin is strong support. In an election numbers like that would be considered a landslide. (Oct 14, 2009 | post #23)
Letters to the editor, Oct. 14, 2009
Cheering AGAINST a massive economic boost for your city, and for the country, in this time of economic struggle? BRILLIANT! Trying to claim that cheering against something that would have a huge positive impact had nothing to do with your opposition to Obama? PRICELESS! (Oct 14, 2009 | post #22)
CLIMATE CHANGE: Campaign targets Bingaman on carbon dioxide
We all like to keep our own money. I think the point was that for some folks, keeping as money as possible is their priority, even at the expense of the good of the country. Personally, I think this C02 debate is moot. If we don't drastically change our energy production/deliver y model, and soon, our economy will be at severe risk of collapse. We should be doing things yesterday to eliminate the astronomical risks to our economic and physical security that reliance on fossil fuels causes. If we do those things then the CO2/GW issue will take care of itself. People who oppose these necessary actions in favor of short-term wallet preservation are foolhardy, because in the end their wallets will be even more severly impacted if we don't start changing now. They are lacking in the enlightened self-interest department. (Oct 14, 2009 | post #70)
Looking for more people on Topix? Browse the Family Album and see who's saying what!|
Reach local customers. Engage a specific demographic. Maximize business-to-business opportunities. Topix can deliver your message.
|
Copyright ©2009 Topix LLC
