Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America

[Apptech]

Some whacko has to post on this sooner or later.
May as well be me :-).

This belongs in TECH *BUT* I'm posting it in OT as we don't
have the maturity to handle it in TECH at a noise level that
is appropriate. If it gets out of hand here we'll have to
trash the thread. If it gets ignored here, that's fine.

This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US
(the title says America) to convert all US electricity
generation to non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10
years. It covers more than that, but that's the core.

There is the inevitably unavoidable rubbish content and some
good ideas and thoughts. The ideas are not without merit but
will probably meet with mindless scathing putdowns from his
opponents & detractors and mindless adulation from his fans.
In between the two it would be good if there could here be
some useful sage and reasoned comments. One can hope :-).

You can find the speech on zillions of sites by Gargoyling

    A Generational Challenge to Repower America

or if you really must, an unembellished html 'plain text'
copy at http://others.servebeer.com/misc.agctra/htm



        Russell



--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

> You can find the speech on zillions of sites by Gargoyling
>
>    A Generational Challenge to Repower America
>
> or if you really must, an unembellished html 'plain text'

Doh !!!!!!!!!!!!

> copy at http://others.servebeer.com/misc.agctra/htm

        copy at http://others.servebeer.com/misc.agctra.htm


        Russell




--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[piclist-7]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Apptech wrote:
> This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US
> (the title says America) to convert all US electricity
> generation to non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10
> years. It covers more than that, but that's the core.

We simply do not have the technical, political or economic capital to do
this in ten years.

However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we could make some
massive improvements.  If we reduse the need for oil a small amount, it
can make a HUGE decrease in the cost.  Thats how things work when a
resource is not enough to meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit
that limit.  A 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of
gas back to $1 or $2 a gallon.

So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing wrong with
trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7 years of head in the
sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.

(You were right to post it in OT.. I would have moved it here for my
crazy ranting post anyway :-)

--
Ian Smith
www.ian.org
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Derward]

----- Original Message -----
From: <piclist@...>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <piclist@...>
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 12:31 PM
Subject: Re: [OT]:: Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America


<snip>
>
> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing wrong with
> trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7 years of head in the
> sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.

The leadership problem did not start the last 7 years,  we had this problem
start
in the late 1970s.  And I have not seen any one do anything about it.

Derward Myrick

> (You were right to post it in OT.. I would have moved it here for my
> crazy ranting post anyway :-)
>
> --
> Ian Smith
> www.ian.org
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Tony Smith-11]

> > This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US (the
> > title says America) to convert all US electricity generation to
> > non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10 years. It
> covers more than
> > that, but that's the core.
>
> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic
> capital to do this in ten years.
>
> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we
> could make some massive improvements.  If we reduse the need
> for oil a small amount, it can make a HUGE decrease in the
> cost.  Thats how things work when a resource is not enough to
> meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit that limit.  A
> 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of gas
> back to $1 or $2 a gallon.
>
> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing
> wrong with trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7
> years of head in the sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.

Using less oil won't drop the price, there are other markets besides the USA
that'll ensure high prices remain.  Still, if you don't use it, who cares
what the price is?

As you say, no harm in trying.  A politition with vision, must be a mirage.

Tony

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[piclist-7]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Derward Myrick wrote:
> The leadership problem did not start the last 7 years,  we had this problem
> start
> in the late 1970s.  And I have not seen any one do anything about it.

True.  Carter said we needed to get off of forign oil, move to renewable
engery, conserve resources.  Even put solar panels on the roof of the
White House.

Then Regan came in, pulled the solar panels down and eliminated most of
the programs Carter started.  And since then, nobody has done anything
about it.

--
Ian SMith
www.ian.org
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Spehro Pefhany]

Quoting piclist@...:

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Apptech wrote:
>> This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US
>> (the title says America) to convert all US electricity
>> generation to non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10
>> years. It covers more than that, but that's the core.
>
> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic capital to do
> this in ten years.
>
> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we could make some
> massive improvements.  If we reduse the need for oil a small amount, it
> can make a HUGE decrease in the cost.  Thats how things work when a
> resource is not enough to meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit
> that limit.  A 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of
> gas back to $1 or $2 a gallon.

That was the case in the old days, when the US was a huge part of oil
consumption and growth in oil consumption-- partly because rich Europe
and rich Japan chose to squelch consumer demand for fuel (which they  
had to import) through extremely heavy taxation. By simply reducing US  
demand
(for example, by devaluing the dollar and increasing the price to US
consumers) the price would be reduced in real terms since the market
would only bear so much. But with the BRIC countries experiencing  
massive increases in wealth, and even with the non-oil energy sources  
being exploited to a much greater degree by wind farms in China, coal  
fired and nuclear plants, and biofuels in Brazil, we are still seeing  
very high growth rates in industrializing countries. Further, they`ve  
chosen to tax fuel to a very limited degree, so prices are  
more-or-less on a par with US prices.

So, I think conservation and alternative energy sources are most likely
not to reduce US dollar valued energy costs but more likely just keep things
steady. Further, as the rupee and the yuan appreciate vis-a-vis the  
USD, that means that two billion people can more easily outbid  
Americans for the same limited energy (and polymer) resources. As it  
is, we seem to be on an
unstoppable curve to 100E6 barrels per day, which is a problem if
supply in fact tops out at 80E6 barrels per day. I do think prices will
likely moderate a bit from current levels, but nothing like the $15-20
a barrel we saw in the 90`s.

> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing wrong with
> trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7 years of head in the
> sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.
>
> (You were right to post it in OT.. I would have moved it here for my
> crazy ranting post anyway :-)
>
> --
> Ian Smith
> www.ian.org
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
s...@...             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com


--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Bob Axtell-3]

"Pushing as hard as possible on all fronts" is a good idea but financially
disastrous.

It would be cheaper to simply invade Saudi Arabia and take the oil. Sooner
or later, somebody else will if we don't.

--Bob A

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:31 AM, <piclist@...> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Apptech wrote:
> > This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US
> > (the title says America) to convert all US electricity
> > generation to non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10
> > years. It covers more than that, but that's the core.
>
> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic capital to do
> this in ten years.
>
> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we could make some
> massive improvements.  If we reduse the need for oil a small amount, it
> can make a HUGE decrease in the cost.  Thats how things work when a
> resource is not enough to meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit
> that limit.  A 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of
> gas back to $1 or $2 a gallon.
>
> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing wrong with
> trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7 years of head in the
> sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.
>
> (You were right to post it in OT.. I would have moved it here for my
> crazy ranting post anyway :-)
>
> --
> Ian Smith
> www.ian.org
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Bob Blick-4]

On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 04:13:40 +1000, "Tony Smith" <ajsmith@...>
said:

> As you say, no harm in trying.  A politition with vision, must be a
> mirage.

When former politicians dedicate themselves to philanthropic work they
can focus on one thing and perhaps do some good - Jimmy Carter with
Habitat for Humanity comes to mind. It must also be rewarding work since
you aren't fighting the same partisan battles over and over.

Cheerful regards,

Bob



--
http://www.fastmail.fm - A fast, anti-spam email service.

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[mikecreid]

If we could design a methane and hot air recovery system for use with all the politicians we would become energy independent very quickly!!!
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "Bob Axtell" <bob.axtell@...>

Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:00:12
To: Microcontroller discussion list - Public.<piclist@...>
Subject: Re: [OT]:: Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America


"Pushing as hard as possible on all fronts" is a good idea but financially
disastrous.

It would be cheaper to simply invade Saudi Arabia and take the oil. Sooner
or later, somebody else will if we don't.

--Bob A

On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:31 AM, <piclist@...> wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Apptech wrote:
> > This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US
> > (the title says America) to convert all US electricity
> > generation to non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10
> > years. It covers more than that, but that's the core.
>
> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic capital to do
> this in ten years.
>
> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we could make some
> massive improvements.  If we reduse the need for oil a small amount, it
> can make a HUGE decrease in the cost.  Thats how things work when a
> resource is not enough to meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit
> that limit.  A 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of
> gas back to $1 or $2 a gallon.
>
> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing wrong with
> trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7 years of head in the
> sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.
>
> (You were right to post it in OT.. I would have moved it here for my
> crazy ranting post anyway :-)
>
> --
> Ian Smith
> www.ian.org
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
>

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Richard-177]

I don't know why we just don't use the petroleum we have in the ground and
in the capped off oil wells.  It seems a logical enough solution; we
certainly have enough oil to achieve energy independence; even though there
is no harm done in pursuing "feasible" alternatives.  As it turns out
ethanol was not a feasible.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Smith" <ajsmith@...>
To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <piclist@...>
Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: [OT]:: Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America

>> > This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US (the
>> > title says America) to convert all US electricity generation to
>> > non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10 years. It
>> covers more than
>> > that, but that's the core.
>>
>> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic
>> capital to do this in ten years.
>>
>> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we
>> could make some massive improvements.  If we reduse the need
>> for oil a small amount, it can make a HUGE decrease in the
>> cost.  Thats how things work when a resource is not enough to
>> meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit that limit.  A
>> 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of gas
>> back to $1 or $2 a gallon.
>>
>> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing
>> wrong with trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7
>> years of head in the sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.
>
>
> Using less oil won't drop the price, there are other markets besides the
> USA
> that'll ensure high prices remain.  Still, if you don't use it, who cares
> what the price is?
>
> As you say, no harm in trying.  A politition with vision, must be a
> mirage.
>
> Tony
>
> --
> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
> View/change your membership options at
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist 

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Bob Blick-4]

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:00:12 -0700, "Bob Axtell" <bob.axtell@...>
said:
> It would be cheaper to simply invade Saudi Arabia and take the oil.
> Sooner
> or later, somebody else will if we don't.

Do we have the crypto keys for all those F-15's we just sold them?

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - Same, same, but different…


--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Carl Denk]

Generally when a well production drops to a low level, the well is
capped (there are some exceptions). At this point the well usually needs
a maintenance cleaning, but it just isn't worth sending the equipment
out to do the cleaning. Capping isn't cheap either, and the well owner
would be just a happy to keep producing, but there just isn't the oil or
gas left to get out. Here in Northern Ohio, there are wells scattered
all around, most are gas producers, some produce a small quantity of oil
also. Generally these well don't produce sufficient oil to justify an
oil pipe line to a terminal and there are tanks next to the well, any
where from 500 gallons to several thousand gallons. Typically these
tanks get visited by a tank truck once a month at most. These wells
typically don't have sufficient pressure to force the oil to the surface
and a pump jack is operated continuously or periodic depending on the
needs of the well. A pump jack is a walking beam type equipment that
moves a rod that goes to the bottom of the well up and down a few feet.
There are numerous pistons with check valves on the rod. The production
could be a few gallons per minute.

30 years ago I drilled a gas well in our back yard, it is 1000' deep and
produces only enough gas for the house. Within a few mile radius there
are probably a half dozen similar wells in use. The well produces no oil
and has had no maintenance since drilled.

Rich wrote:

> I don't know why we just don't use the petroleum we have in the ground and
> in the capped off oil wells.  It seems a logical enough solution; we
> certainly have enough oil to achieve energy independence; even though there
> is no harm done in pursuing "feasible" alternatives.  As it turns out
> ethanol was not a feasible.
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tony Smith" <ajsmith@...>
> To: "'Microcontroller discussion list - Public.'" <piclist@...>
> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2008 2:13 PM
> Subject: RE: [OT]:: Al Gore - A Generational Challenge to Repower America
>
>
>  
>>>> This is a very recent 'speech' by Al Gore challenging the US (the
>>>> title says America) to convert all US electricity generation to
>>>> non-hydrocarbon dependent sources within 10 years. It
>>>>        
>>> covers more than
>>>      
>>>> that, but that's the core.
>>>>        
>>> We simply do not have the technical, political or economic
>>> capital to do this in ten years.
>>>
>>> However, if we pushed as hard as we could on all fronts we
>>> could make some massive improvements.  If we reduse the need
>>> for oil a small amount, it can make a HUGE decrease in the
>>> cost.  Thats how things work when a resource is not enough to
>>> meet demand.  The price skyrockets as you hit that limit.  A
>>> 10% reduction in oil use would probably put the price of gas
>>> back to $1 or $2 a gallon.
>>>
>>> So his goals are unrealistic, but there is absolutly nothing
>>> wrong with trying.  Anything would be better than the last 7
>>> years of head in the sand do-nothings we have had for our leadership.
>>>      
>> Using less oil won't drop the price, there are other markets besides the
>> USA
>> that'll ensure high prices remain.  Still, if you don't use it, who cares
>> what the price is?
>>
>> As you say, no harm in trying.  A politition with vision, must be a
>> mirage.
>>
>> Tony
>>
>> --
>> http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
>> View/change your membership options at
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist 
>>    
>
>  

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Apptech]

> Do we have the crypto keys for all those F-15's we just
> sold them?

Not personally.
But it's probably something like

        "NxF22 >>1xF15:-)"


    R

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Vic Fraenckel]

Bob Blick wrote:
> Do we have the crypto keys for all those F-15's we just sold them?
>
>  
Of course!

Vic
--

*____________________________________________________________________________________________*


*Victor Fraenckel
KC2GUI
windswaytoo ATSIGN gmail DOT com**
*

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Cedric Chang-2]

If you plan to invade SA ( and maybe Iran plus staying in Iraq ) ,  
the only rational approach is to kill everyone that lives there and  
replace them with Americans.  Then you are all set.
cc

> On Jul 25, 2008, at 2:00 PM, Bob Axtell wrote:
>
> "Pushing as hard as possible on all fronts" is a good idea but  
> financially
> disastrous.
>
> It would be cheaper to simply invade Saudi Arabia and take the oil.  
> Sooner
> or later, somebody else will if we don't.
>
> --Bob A
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 10:31 AM, <piclist@...> wrote:
>
>>

--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist

[Cedric Chang-2]

I expect to see some good things happening on the energy front  
because the price of oil is creating a mother of invention.
1)  Development of hydrogen production, distribution and the use of  
Hydrogen as a fuel.
2)  Various methods of producing electricity  ( Solar, wind and yikes  
nookies )
3)  Politicians on stationary bikes

cc
--
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist