The Ogallala Aquifer, which is the source for 50% of the water used from North Dakota to Texas is not big deal to lose. Hell, we're already losing it to climate change.

Oh don't EVEN get me started on that galactic con of a lifetime..

OK, let me clarify..

If you mean "climate change" as in the earth's natural climactic rhythms, then disregard my response..

If you mean "Climate Change" as in the hugely successful Galactic Con perpetrated by the men and women getting rich off of it, then my comment stands..

Michale
269

The amount of power potentially available from sunlight is several orders of magnitude greater than foreseeable human use. Collecting it is still too expensive for anything but peak-demand times, but it's getting cheaper fairly fast.

Define "fairly fast"???

Also, the major problem with solar energy is not collecting it, it's regulating it and storing it..

Collection is easy compared to storage.

I have said it before ad nasuem.. If we took all the billions and billions of dollars that have been spent TALKING about Human Caused Global Warming (Yet The Planet Is Cooling) and LOBBYING for Human Caused Global Warming (Yet The Planet Is Cooling) and put it into practical use, equipping homes with completely independent solar/wind power electrical systems, then our dependency on foreign oil would have taken a huge hit..

The ONLY people making out with this huge galactic scam are the lawyers and the lobbyists and that sex poodle, Al Gore...

Michale
266

The Ogallala Aquifer, which is the source for 50% of the water used from North Dakota to Texas is not big deal to lose. Hell, we're already losing it to climate change.

Oh don't EVEN get me started on that galactic con of a lifetime..

That 50% of the world's supply of shale oil you're talking about? If you'll read my post [4] carefully, it says EIGHT to TEN years before ANY significant oil resources ... IF it can be done.

Yea?? How long til we have viable alternate energy sources??

Decades?? Centuries???

Oh, and by the way? One of the two sources quoted was libertarian. They were essentially quoting Shell Oil engineers. The Other One? The Green Conservative.

Oh, so because they have a dog in the hunt, they are lying??

The sources you quote are environmentalists.. And THEY have been shown to be the epitome of objectivity and logic, right??

Seriously!!???

Gotta hand it to ya Michale. Just can't get anything past you.

No, you can't.. So don't even bother trying...

:D

At least we agree that sacrificing Los Angeles isn't such a big sacrifice.. :D

Michale
265

The Ogallala Aquifer, which is the source for 50% of the water used from North Dakota to Texas is not big deal to lose. Hell, we're already losing it to climate change. Let all those guys get along with only one bath a week.

That 50% of the world's supply of shale oil you're talking about? If you'll read my post [4] carefully, it says EIGHT to TEN years before ANY significant oil resources ... IF it can be done.

Oh, and by the way? One of the two sources quoted was libertarian. They were essentially quoting Shell Oil engineers. The Other One? The Green Conservative.

Yup. Real leftwing loonies those are.

Gotta hand it to ya Michale. Just can't get anything past you.

Is that REALLY a sacrifice??? :D

But hay.. If you say the US has no oil, how could I possibly argue with that??

Oh wait..

Massive Oil Deposit Could Increase US reserves by 10x
nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news2.13s.html

Of course, along with oil, there is plenty of natural gas..

U.S. Should Drill for Oil and Gas in Arctic, Offshore
redorbit.com/news/business/1424734/us_should_drill_for_oil_and_gas_in_arctic_offshore

THEN.... Then there is the shale deposits that you are referring to. 50% of the entire world's shale oil supply is the central US..

fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/publications/Pubs-NPR/40010-373.pdf

But how could I possible think that the US has oil???

So, why aren't we exploiting our resources??

Oh that's right.. Left wing environmental activists.

Michale

According to what I can find (which you didn't feel like looking up) it will be 8 - 10 years before production can be up to snuff ... IF it can be done. IF it is economically feasible (read: Can Shell make billions on it). IF the water wars don't make it impossible (all that water is currently going to cities full of actual voting people ... many of them Republicans).

I am constrained to point out that polluting the water of Wyoming, is kinda a downer for the shale oil/natural gas production hypothesis.

Can't make an omelet without cracking a few eggs..

You want to end the dependency on foreign oil..

There'll have to be some sacrifices...

ie: We still gots to have the Arab oil. Or the oil from Venezuela. Or the oil from Columbia.

I guess we'll just have to hurry up and learn the secrets of antimatter power, eh???

Where's Zefram Cochrane when ya need him! :D

Michale
264

ie: We still gots to have the Arab oil. Or the oil from Venezuela. Or the oil from Columbia.

Further, without shale oil, there are roughly 155BBL available (21BBl proven, 134BBL unproven but estimated). There are currently 8.5 years of reserves (proven) to production ration. Adding in the estimated but unproven gives roughly 50 years of CURRENT oil useage levels for the US.

Not exactly oil independence. But then, you gotta have faith (Feith??).

I am constrained to point out that the US has vast amounts of oil resources that would allow us to do just that..

Michale
255

That's not to say oil access was not a concern, but in fact what scared Washington was not that Arabs might sell oil to Russia but that someone might give the USSR basing rights. One of the first things Reagan did was beef up American naval presence in the Persian Gulf to counteract their beefed-up naval presence, threatening our access to that ocean of oil.

Link to a couple of very good books on the topic:

http://www.hraugh.com/docs/guardiansofthegulf.html

and

http://www.amazon.com/Twin-Pillars-Desert-Storm-Americas/dp/0688112544

I agree that "we are just as unprepared to deal with the aftermath now as when we first went in".

America has paid lip-service to democracy all over the world for years, as you stated, (as it is paying lip-service to democracy here at home as well, in some respects), so the question is whether that will change or when it will change. We also have so many powerful reactionary elements in this country that can barely stomach the notion of Islamic countries existing, that any rational leader here has his work cut out for him (or her).

Furthermore, America, collectively, has to face-up squarely to its dependence on Oil and begin to deal with it constructively rather than creating wars to try to gain control over other people's oil.

We'll see.