Irrelevant. Short term profits and incredible campaign contributions killed whatever chance we had to develop any alternative energy sources. But if you put former and current industry insiders, lawyers and lobbyists in charge of it all what do you expect?

You should actually do some reading about eco impact of large solar arrays and wind farms as espoused by your eco radical friends... You can for instance install solar and wind power generation on your personal residence today... That would of course require YOU to spend YOUR own money to help YOURSELF and we all know that you are loath to do... Your eco radical friends will be glad to come over and point out all the ecological damage done by the construction of the solar cells and the birds your wind generator is placing at risk...


Only 535 members of Congress can make legislation... was that the lawyers, lobbyists, and industry insiders you were refering too?

I'm talking about the long list of corporate whores Bush and his complicit congress placed in charge of everything. But you knew that.

How does this genius plan to transmit this electricity? Gonna build an electric pipeline?

Again, there are only 535 men and women elected to Congress who can make legislation...


Don't have to worry about that... eco radicals don't like high power transmission lines either... not to mention a thousand miles of NIMBYs to deal with between Dakotas and Texas...

Bush appointed them, you god damned idiot.

It's not about me buntsy, your assertions are inaccurate and spiteful, BTW. What is the problem, exactly? What makes you think I have "eco=radical" friends?

I guess you can't post anything to back up your assertions on the decline of the solar and wind power industries, so you have to rely on the logical fallacy of ad hominem.

I'm not impressed.



The ones that bought the votes of those 535 members?

Why, yes.

You can be naiive and delusional and insist that lobbyists don't affect legislation, but you would be wrong. Obviously it does.





Um, yes, create [forge] a national electricity transmission grid from the Dakotas to Texas would indicate making funds available to build that infrastructure.

Friedman explained that. Clearly.

... and of course you have some proof of the specific legislative votes purchased? Senators McCain and Feingold often asked for names and never were able to come up with any...

... my assertions are dead on about daBee which is why she did not even bother to respond to them good progressive that she is... which of course puts her clearly in league with her eco radical anti capital and technology kindred spirits...

Apparently he and you don't understand the problems inherent with that. That's why I asked the question.

Not a milliwatt of Dakota windpower to any state that has blocked a wind farm project...

Wrong. The lobbyists write the legislation and pay the congress critters to introduce it.

The fact that industry has been writing our laws is well established and irrefutable.



Once again, this is merely another hysterical assertion that is based on nothing but your own ignorance. The republicans have been in power for six years. The ecological lobby has no influence and there have been several articles that show it's not the ecologists that have kept the energy from investing in infrastructure.

I suppose thy make a convenient whipping boy for energy industry apologists.

Bush appointed the 535 members of Congress? OK then...

There are problems involved with any infrastructure improvements.

There are problems inherent with anything.

Seems to me that most of us are paying for power bought from out of state sources, so it isn't as if it can't be done.



Spite isn't very productive.

Still waiting for the specific payments to specific members of Congress........

Still waiting for the law introduced in Congress with someone other than a member of Congresses name on it as the bill sponsor... or voted on by someone other than a member of Congress......

All power resides in Federal Congress then eh daBee? Eco radicals quite effective in blocking alternative energy projects at all levels of gubment...

Eliminate gubment regulation and taxation of electrical power transmission infrastructure and there will be no shortage... or you and your eco radical ELF friends who know how every business should be run could pool your capital and start an electrical transmission business... oh, I forgot, you gots no capital....


Very typical of daBee... she wants someone else to pay for her charity... she wants someone else to bear the ecological damage from her power demand...

These losses can increase the cost of power to the point that it's not economically feasable to transmit over such distances as Friedman suggests.

Damn, the Cons in Conn will have to generate their own electricity?

daBee will just have to follow the lead of her kindred spirit ELFers and turn off all electrical devices...

Well, they can't depend on those idiots in Ohio to switch over the interconnetions for them, that's for sure.

Wind farms off Cape Cod might help.

Must be the same Ohioans who cannot figure out how to vote.... After all they did fight a war with Michigan over Toledo... Ohio lost...

Damn shame that Toledo thing.

daBee should just erect a wind generator right there at her residence... that and a few solar cells on the roof... a little geothermal heat pump action... wonder how daBee has her place insulated... using CF lights... hows about solar hot water or run boiler of geothermal... maybe not up to 130 at night but daBee can shower with an ELF to stay warm...

And technology is standing still?

No doubt you won't get Texas windpower to Connecticut, but you can get it to states that can get their own power to Connecticut.

[shrug]

If we're willing to pay high prices for it, isn't that "good" for the market? I don't see the point in dismissing Friedman's ideas out of hand due to potential problems.

Anything that gets the U.S. off Middle Eastern Oil is a good thing, and will increase our security to boot.

Their burden to bear... Of course MI got the UP, so we got that whole UPer thing too...

Plenty of capitalists ready to supply electrical power where there is demand... restrictions largely the effect of gubment action...

We do. We have nukes. We export our power to Long Island, actually.

What has this have to do with generating and expanding wind power in Texas and the Dakotas?? Are you that afraid of Oil becomming less important, and thus cheaper due to decreased demand? Is your capital tied up in oil futures?

Testing da Bee...

Anything = ANWR


You never do actually pay attention do you... I am long an advocate for moving away from fossil fuel economy... you get your gubment out of the way and it will happen a lot faster... of course without gubment protection all them union GM, Ford, and Chrysler jobs tied directly to the fossil fuel economy will be gone...

In the mean time... plenty that YOU could do for YOURSELF... but better to tell Dakotans how they should do for you...

Where does the technology stand now? Your man talks like building a grid will be simple enough tomorrow. He's talking power from Dakotas to Texas, not CT, you know.

The solution for CT would be a bunch of Northeast wind farms, for shorter transmision lines, lower losses, cheaper power. You could have it all with today's, not tomorrow's technology.

High temperature superconductors may be feasable in 5 to 10 years. Right now they are only working with them on a small experimental scale. That wil be fine a decade from now, but the problem is now.

Looks like the NE lagging behind in electrical power production

Electrical Power Production By State

But I digress. Friedman says so and you believe, regardless of any practicality or economic considerations.

Pretty safe bet the Friedman ranch in not in NE, KA, or OK...

http://www.homewindpower.com/







For sure.

Actualy Texas and the Dakotas to elsewhere. Did you read the article?



And that has what to do with Friedmans column? The middle of the country has the most wind, and he's talking about setting an example.

Connecticut could and should. Right now we're dealing with transmission lines and infrastructure that takes OUR power TO other states, so I'm not sure that using my little state is the right example, anyway.



How long would it take to build the infrastructure?

That won't get built in a day, will it? Seems to be smart to start now.

You can't start building now because the technolgy is not scaled up. You start building once that's in place. So add that time to the development time.

So because the Northeast is lagging behind in wind power, Friedmans proposal should be dismissed.

That's just silly.

Whatever, boys. You're really just too much.

Have a nice day.

He sure ain't going to send power from out west to CT. That's for sure. You already said that yourself.

OK.

Perhaps we should just leave everything until it's too late to do any good. I mean thinking ahead is so cost effective. It does cut into this years profit margin, so I understand why you are so resistant to it.

Why invest in the future. You won't be around. So fark the next generation. Right?



It's really beside his point.

I understand the one you are attempting to make, but it doesn't affect Friedman's.

Just talking practicality. Technology marches on. I'm just telling you like it is. You the one that doesn't want to accept the facts.



Friedman's little plan is pie in the sky as technology stands to day. He may even know that, but he's not letting on. Talk's cheap.



Where have I resisted? I've only tried to explain to you how there is no quick fix for long distance transmission of wind produced electrical energy. I have explained in some detail why that is. Meantime other things can be done. More local, regional wind farms would be one.

I have tired to maintain an intellectual level of conversation here this morning, only to have you prove once again that it's totally impossible.

With that I'll give you a well deserved Go fark yourself and move on.

Go to hell. You're a pig.

farkoff moran.

In the name of Christ?

How does that affect the quality of the environment for everyone?

Oh stop. You are the one that OBVIOUSLY didn't read the article. Friedman is talking about using Texas as an example and having a similar program in ALL STATES. You have been debating a strawman buntsy threw in. I just wasn't interested.



Hardly. Texas IS today. He wanted to expand that plan, build a grid FROM the Dakotas to TEXAS to fuel the large cities IN THAT AREA. Here is the relative passage:


He is in essence agreeing with you. Duh.

Again, you are debating the strawman buntsy set up, you and he introduced the idea of Connecticut and long distance transmission. Out of spite, actually.



If that's the case, it would have helped to actually READ Friedman's piece, instead of piling on with buntsy's ridicule. The fact is you and I likely agree more on this subject then you and buntsy do, and I have sought out your opinion ON THIS SUBJECT before because it is one of the few things I actually respect YOUR opinion on.



Yeah, well that figures. Just don't try to pin the lack of "intellectual level of conversation" on me. You and bunsy decided to change the subject to a stupid critique of my state as a childish put down of me somehow. And you couldn't even get that much right.



It doesn't.

Scientists drill back in time in Antarctica

Scientific American, by Deborah Zabarenko


12/15/2006 10:43:34 PM


Ross Ice Shelf, Antarctica - From a distance, the ANDRILL operation appears out of nowhere like a mirage: a white-draped tower amid giant blue boxcars laid out on a frozen sea. But this mammoth venture to drill through ice, ocean and back through time /snip/ studies the core for signs of marine life that indicate an open sea where there is now a 280-foot (85-meter) thick sheet of ice. Over the last 4 million years or so, Niessen said, there is evidence of some five such warm periods in Antarctica


Those periods were caused by the American Indians smoking their peace pipes!
..........

I don't even read most of Buntsie's stuff. You can carry on your own argument with him separately if you are so inclined. I suggested, and sincerely, that the northeast work out it's own power needs, which may be somewhat different than those out west. The grid that you and Friedman call for is lacking due to the transmission distances required, most likely to Califorinia.

I say again. We don't have the superconductor technology yet. You cannot build this "infrastructure" until you have the specifications as to what you are going to hang on the towers. Pilot program much different that actual practical, economically viable production program. This will take time. It's not a quick fix. I have not and will not be an obstructionist in this or any other viable options. I will however tell you it is not just an option where you build towers, hang wires and flip a switch.

This is what you and Friedman don't seem to understand. It's real easy to sit at a desk and look at things and say "this is what we should do". It's quite another to get it done, especially when the technology has not yet been developed. That's looking at it realistically, something which you all don't seem able to do.

True on so many levels. Some people really think government writes a check, taxes some rich folks and everything ought to get done easily.

Yep. Too bad that's not the way it works.

Once again.

Friedman is calling for a Texas style program in every state.


Once again.

Friedman is calling for a Texas style program in every state. As the Texas program exists, it would seem that technology is available now.

Insofar as the Northeast is concerned, it is not like he adressed it either specifically or incidentally except that it is part of "all states."

I understand that the scenario YOU presented isn't available, but you are just arguing with your own premise. Not mine, or Friedman's.

That's why it's helpful to actually read what it is you are supposdly debating.



Irrelavent to this discussion, actually.

If Texas could do it, so can every other state.

That was the point.

Where's he gonna send the power from the Dakotas? He says send the power to the cities. Where are the cities?

Look at a map of the central time zone.

Lots of big cities between the Dakotas and Texas.

Come on.

This ain't rocket science.



Setting an example from the area that has the most wind

Geez, Bart

when you're willfully obtuse, I just have to give up.

You win.

Friedman's an idiot.

Friedman said this:



And this is the part I have been discussing, all along. I believe the Bee has been trying to refute my argument on this exact same item all along. You got to have long efficient long distance transmission likes for it.

I rest my case.