TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › if they can do why cant we
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

if they can do why cant we

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
seen this before, but if they can do it, why cant we.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science...and/index.html

some good news at least


http://www.popularmechanics.com/blog...s/4214707.html

the goverment needs to stop wasting time, and commit this country to getting rid of the need for forgin oil imports.. something they have should have done back in the 70's
post #2 of 20
I agree, good for the Icelanders, that's great.

I have never understood WHY governments want us dependent on oil.
post #3 of 20
Our governments want us dependent on fuel in order to line their own pockets. Our car manufacturers also want us to be dependent on fuel.

Ask any one of a number of entrepreneurs who have come up with alternative fuels and let them tell you about all the stumbling blocks and brick walls they have come up against when trying to get the government to allow them to go ahead.
post #4 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Our governments want us dependent on fuel in order to line their own pockets. Our car manufacturers also want us to be dependent on fuel.

Ask any one of a number of entrepreneurs who have come up with alternative fuels and let them tell you about all the stumbling blocks and brick walls they have come up against when trying to get the government to allow them to go ahead.
Alternative fuels has been done successfully once before. The diesel engine was designed to run on peanut oil. Standard oil, in a near panic, created diesel fuel before the engine was even marketed. Early diesel fuel was little more than kerosene filtered through cotton cloth, but it kept them in the game and the new engine "in it's place".

The only thing about Iceland is, we are talking about a country that is roughly the same size as the state of Kentucky, and a population between 300 and 400,000.
post #5 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skippymjp View Post
Alternative fuels has been done successfully once before. The diesel engine was designed to run on peanut oil. Standard oil, in a near panic, created diesel fuel before the engine was even marketed. Early diesel fuel was little more than kerosene filtered through cotton cloth, but it kept them in the game and the new engine "in it's place".

The only thing about Iceland is, we are talking about a country that is roughly the same size as the state of Kentucky, and a population between 300 and 400,000.
My BIL has an old Mercedes diesel that he has converted to vegetable oil (used French Fry oil) It runs just fine. He was one of the first to try to get through to the government on this and got shot down.
post #6 of 20
Also Iceland is an island and not that big so they only need around 15 fuelling stations to have the entire country covered. I.e you shouldn't have to be careful with how far you drive and drive out of range of being able to get hydrogen for your car.

The population is around 300.000, used to be just under but it has probably hit 300.000 by now.

It was weird seeing the hydro buses around though, they released a lot of steam into the air and their exhaust was at the top of the car in the corner so the cloud they left behind reminded me a little bit of steam trains in the movies or something.
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Our governments want us dependent on fuel in order to line their own pockets. Our car manufacturers also want us to be dependent on fuel.

Ask any one of a number of entrepreneurs who have come up with alternative fuels and let them tell you about all the stumbling blocks and brick walls they have come up against when trying to get the government to allow them to go ahead.

Yes, I know about all the stumbling blocks, but the "line their own pockets" statement does not explain it for me.

I am not well versed in economics, global or otherwise.
post #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
but the "line their own pockets" statement does not explain it for me.
It's very simple... the Bush family (and several others) own oil fields and have always been involved in politics. Why would they want to encourage the use of oil alternatives when it would mean they'd lose money?
post #9 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I am not well versed in economics, global or otherwise.
Obviously, I'm not either. I always thought that I knew enough economics to get by, but I'm learning a thing or 12 every day
post #10 of 20
The tax we pay per litre of fuel here in Canada is astonishing. The price of the fuel itself is a pittance in comparison to the taxes.
post #11 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_wings View Post
It's very simple... the Bush family (and several others) own oil fields and have always been involved in politics. Why would they want to encourage the use of oil alternatives when it would mean they'd lose money?
No, it is not simple at all. Our dependence on oil predates the Bush's by decades.

Not everything is Bush's fault. This is not just a Bush thing.
post #12 of 20
Quote:
No, it is not simple at all. Our dependence on oil predates the Bush's by decades.

Not everything is Bush's fault. This is not just a Bush thing.
You are right, keep driving that gas guzzler of yours.
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
No, it is not simple at all. Our dependence on oil predates the Bush's by decades.

Not everything is Bush's fault. This is not just a Bush thing.
I completely agree with you on this. However, the power of the oil industry itself, has had tremendous influence over many many policiticians in Texas, Washington, and many other places.

One of the conspiracy rumors about Kennedy's assassination place it in the hands of the oil industry. Remember LBJ, senator from Texas, was vice-president at the time. Please don't think I'm defending the theory -- only pointing out the power of the oil industry.

I've also heard rumors that the oil industry and car industry powers-that-be are intertwined and in league to keep American oil-dependent.
post #14 of 20
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
I agree, good for the Icelanders, that's great.

I have never understood WHY governments want us dependent on oil.
there was a news story or maybe a internview i saw, with the presdent of dow chemical, Where he was taking about trying to make there business more Green, and the pressure he got from outside of company to STOP doing that.

i will have to look and see if i can find that
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
Our governments want us dependent on fuel in order to line their own pockets. Our car manufacturers also want us to be dependent on fuel.

Ask any one of a number of entrepreneurs who have come up with alternative fuels and let them tell you about all the stumbling blocks and brick walls they have come up against when trying to get the government to allow them to go ahead.
I agree with that in addition to the fact that we're a Throw away society. If I could buy this car, I probably will never go to another vehicle until this died. That equals less sales for the economy.
post #16 of 20
Thread Starter 
i tend to run a car until it blows up, lol i hate using my money on cars, (motorcycles different story) But i think and i mean think, the tax in ohio is 55 cents a gallon ? could be more.
post #17 of 20
Here's another story of a country -- a big one -- Brazil, who expects to end their foreign oil dependency very soon:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1454613.shtml

and Russia is also stepping up ethanol production:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...n1454613.shtml
post #18 of 20
Thread Starter 
oh, yea, i had forgotten about Brazil,
i really think the only way, that this can be done here, is if people start demanding it.
post #19 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by ckblv View Post
Not everything is Bush's fault. This is not just a Bush thing.
How is it you can quote me but not read what I wrote? I said family -three generations back referring to Prescott and his dealings, not George W. Bush.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by strange_wings View Post
How is it you can quote me but not read what I wrote? I said family -three generations back referring to Prescott and his dealings, not George W. Bush.
In all fairness your post did say "Bush" and other families.

Please be respectful when posting.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › if they can do why cant we