Senate votes to open arctic refuge to oil drilling - Page 2

Saw11_2000 · #11 03-16-2005, 10:00 PM

The network is coming. For cars to utilize hydrogen, they need to upgrade their cars. This takes many, many years. When there is a demand, the oil companies (or energy companies if you wish) will provide. And prices will fall, because there is just SOO MUCH HYDROGEN.

No*s · #12 03-16-2005, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saw11_2000

The network is coming. For cars to utilize hydrogen, they need to upgrade their cars. This takes many, many years. When there is a demand, the oil companies (or energy companies if you wish) will provide. And prices will fall, because there is just SOO MUCH HYDROGEN.

No, it won't. There's the problem of storage in those high-cost cells. Hydrogen escapes storage fast. It can be expensive to produce. I don't see this as a viable solution yet

Saw11_2000 · #13 03-16-2005, 10:06 PM

Yes, not yet. But it will become a viable solution in time. Fuel cells are also an option, although I think BP is not investigating that option.

painted wolf · #14 03-17-2005, 01:06 AM

*grrrrrr* *snarl* humans fing up the planet some more so we can have a few more years of mindless polution *angry feral noises*

Green Gaia · #15 03-17-2005, 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saw11_2000

But it will become a viable solution in time.

But we needed them 30+ years ago!

michel · #16 03-17-2005, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maize

Baloney. The technology is there, we just don't want to use it.

This is one of my real 'Bug Bears'; I have been convinced in my own mind (and obviously have no proof whatsoever apart from the 'odd' strange stories that go around), that you're absolutely right, Maize. The only reason the technology isn't used is that it would cause too many people to loose money if it was made available; too many jobs in Industry would potentially be at risk, and the Industries would have to invest vast sums to 'adjust' to producing machinery, whatever, capable of using whatever new form of energy.

Green Gaia · #17 03-17-2005, 07:29 AM

This is just a band-aid on a broken leg, and in the long term, it's going to make things worse because not only will we have used up every single last drop of oil we could find, precious wildlife and the environment will be forever destoryed... and those alternatives still won't be "viable". When are we going to learn?!?!

painted wolf · #18 03-17-2005, 12:18 PM

from what I've read the oil companies don't want to invest the money on the meager oil reserves in ANWR.... they hope that it will make it easier for them to pass laws to drill in more profitable areas like off the coasts of Florida and California.
Places with strict laws about drilling in thier fedrally protected lands.

Now that one refuge is open for business it should be much more simple to open them all up.
Drilling in the everglades anyone?

wa:do

angellous_evangellous · #19 03-17-2005, 02:23 PM

I must agree that drilling in Alaska is one of the stupidest things that Congress has done in recent years. It is a waste in every regard: political, envirmental, and time. It is a political waste because it provides a buffer in which America can gain a false sense of independence in the world that she needs to wage wars on her own with as little approval, help, or support from other nations. Furthermore, it allows America to continue to ignore OPEC or at least treat it with contempt. That is, instead of drilling in Alaska we should continue to fight the diplomatic war with OPEC so that we can use their resources instead of our own.

It is an environmental and time waste because it only delays the inevitable: oil will cease to be the elixor of America, we know it, and we should bust our butts now to wean ourselves off of it. Since when has cost been a serious factor? High costs can lubricate the economy and give us the political freedom that we need for our interests. We should not waste our natural resources at the cost of the environment when we know that we must develop alternative energies.