Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
20 years ago, some dude thought to himself, "Geez, what'd happen if Blockbusters and Hollywood Videos gone out of business and you can't rent movies anymore?! We'd all just watch live TV and life would blows!"
.
Oil is not a fad. Look around on every street .
There are cars and trucks. using gasoline .
Nuclear seems like the best alternative, except the disposal of the spent fuel rods. And when things go extremely south, like Fukushima.
Those are non-issues.
Fission reactors are antiquated and obsolete.
Fission reactors are expensive to operate because of the cost to produce the fuel and then the cost to remove, transport and store (on a permanent basis) the spent fuel.
For fusion reactors like the Integral Fast Reactor, you produce fuel only once regardless of the number of fusion reactors you intend to build.
Run the reactor for a year and you just produced fuel to run it for another year plus run another reactor for 6 months.
There is no waste.
Fission reactors are also a poor choice because the fission produce produced Plutonium-239 and Plutonium-240, and if you run the reactor sloppily, Plutonium-241 and Plutonium-242 as well. That's a bad choice if your goal is to eliminate nuclear weapons proliferation.
The Japanese were stupid to locate a reactor in an area where it was already known to have suffered the effects of tsunamis recently, in the late past and in the distant past.
Only a moron would put a reactor on a US coast.
You put a facility in Wyoming with four reactors to power the entire West and then another facility in Kansas with four reactors to power the entire East and that's the end of it.
There is also a reactor design in testing that uses reactor waste.
As I recall, four of those reactors could power the US for 400 years and burn up all the reactor waste in the US saving lots of tax-payer money, reducing the potential for terrorists acts targeting the waste, and protecting people from accidental exposure.
Nuclear seems like the best alternative, except the disposal of the spent fuel rods. And when things go extremely south, like Fukushima.
Yes, disposal of rods is something that needs to be worked out. It took a catastrophic 'perfect storm' event for Fukushima to occur. Japan's had many earthquakes and it took this earthquake/tsunami to finally beat it. I still believe in nuclear and i think Andrew Yang mentioned support of it in one his interviews to bring it back.
Oil prices have been down for some time. The glut is not by Biden. The Oil Cartels and powers that set pricing are and the fact as even the US besides other Nations found new sources of Oil and production like from Shale. They still need higher prices then they are seeing.
It is a Supply and Demand thing except there is a Cartel involved in pricing. Somewhat like how gemstone and diamonds are by a sort of Cartel of setting prices. Big Oil we know about that Cartel of Nations.
In reality, Big Oil has been - investing in Renewable Energy itself all along. Fracking for Natural Gas has to diversify too as It knows it needs to have a piece of that too and the rest of the world is moving into the FUTURE in it and no matter who is President so do we.
We all need some commonsense that no one is ending Fracking overnight if Joe Biden wins. It is childish to think this becomes like some instant hatchet attack and it automatically ends.
These scare tactics are like all these - Conspiracy Theory advocates that some eat up as proof only one man is some Savior of Oil or Coal or Gas. SOME COMMONSENSE that this could be a strategy over time and is not first on the CHOPPING BLOCK OF JOE BIDEN.
It is a Supply and Demand thing except there is a Cartel involved in pricing.
False.
OPEC has never in its history set oil prices. Oil prices have always been determined by Supply & Demand on the global market, in addition to the Supply & Demand in regional markets.
What OPEC does is set quotas for oil production for member-States, which is not the same thing as setting prices.
In spite of the fact that OPEC has periodically set quotas for member-States, the member-States have repeatedly ignored the quotas and produced as much as they damn well pleased.
I do favor ending subsidies for carbon-based industries. Let them wither organically, so to speak.
Do you mean the subsidies poor homeowners and renters get for heating oil in the winter? For natural gas? For help with their electric bills? Those are the "subsidies" that are being discussed when people talk about "cutting subsidies for the oil industry". Bet you didn't hear that on BSNBC.
The population of the Earth has gone from around 1 billion in 1900 to around 7 billion today mostly because of oil development. What will happen when oil production is stopped? Wind and solar are a joke compared to oil, a joke.
Oil companies will go the way of businesses along Route 66 after the interstate (renewable energy) was established.
Fossil fuels run our country and the world
If we don't use our resources we will have to spend exorbitant amounts for foreign oil which would be devastating.
That is the fear high profit oil companies want you to have.
Where is that "not going to live in fear" mentality of the right?
Oh, an antiquated, destructive industry is worried they might not make quite as many billions of dollars under Biden than they would otherwise. How awful
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.