ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Using Fuels Recklessly

Science says fossil fuels were built up over billions of years, and we are consuming them recklessly over a few centuries. 6-day Creationism says God made them in one day. Does this make any difference to the suggestion that we are using them recklessly and should seek alterative power sources?

Moderator - Fossil Fuels happened during the flood. Is that the one day you are refering to?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Creationism Quiz
 ---alan8566_of_uk on 8/31/09
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



Ralph ... You've changed your position!!

Donna ... Natural Gas is running out too

Steveng ... If oil is naturally occurring, why are the oil fields running dry?

Mima ... Do you think nuclear energy is the way we need to go? It seems to me the be the only option long term, in spite of the difficulties of dealing with the waste/
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/15/09


It is VERY easy to covert vehicles to "natural gas" as fuel rather than gasoline. Rural people who use natural gas for heating, have long used it for fuel as well. We have a very abundant supply of natural gas. It is clean and easy to access (tho it occurs along with oil) I wonder why we don't make better use of it.
---Donna66 on 9/14/09
Where did you get that misinformation? Natural gas is even more rare than oil. California switched to natural gas from coal, and it is 4 times more expensive. It has to be imported from other countries on special supertankers and is a rare commodity indeed.
---obewan on 9/15/09


It is VERY easy to covert vehicles to "natural gas" as fuel rather than gasoline. Rural people who use natural gas for heating, have long used it for fuel as well. We have a very abundant supply of natural gas. It is clean and easy to access (tho it occurs along with oil) I wonder why we don't make better use of it.
---Donna66 on 9/14/09


I agree with ralph. Man's ingenuity (providing he is free to use it) is capable of developing whatever we need to survive. I see wind and solar power as quite limited in their practical usefulness, but chemical developments hold great unknown potential.
---Donna66 on 9/14/09


obewan: "...The Earth is only so big, and so are the oil deposits. It is impossible to declare "infinite" supply! The supply IS finite, and WILL someday be gone." ...Oil has a limited lifespan and its days are numbered. Also, the world economy is BASED upon a source of plentyful CHEAP oil."

Have you not read my post dated 9/9/09? By what some scientists now believe oil is naturally occuring. Laboratory tests show that there isn't enough plants and animals in all of time - even if the entire earth was covered by plants and animals - to make as much oil as we have used during the past 100 years. The earth would have to exist for a trillion times a trillion years ago. And you and I know the earth isn't that old.
---Steveng on 9/14/09




I realize exactly what I'm saying and it isn't that there is an infinite supply. Where did you come up with that? What I am simply saying is that we will move beyond oil before it is even close to being used up. It has been so throughout history.

Man relied on horses for transportation, powered by grass and hay. Ship were powered by wind. Homes were lit with candles. We've been in the age of oil for only about 100 years. It too will be replaced by something else, or made more efficient.

StrongAxe, to answer your silly question: No.

I need a cookie.
---ralph7477 on 9/14/09


ralph7477:

So does this mean that you are putting your faith in technology to sustain mankind long-term?
---StrongAxe on 9/14/09


And that's why we will never run out of oil.
---ralph7477 on 9/14/09

Don't you realize what you are saying? The Earth is only so big, and so are the oil deposits. It is impossible to declare "infinite" supply! The supply IS finite, and WILL someday be gone.

Of course technology has the potential to help, but it must be stuff like forcing superheated steam into extremely deep wells. That WILL drastically increase cost to the point that sources like liquid coal or nuclear generated hydrogen may actually become cheaper.

Oil has a limited lifespan and its days are numbered. Also, the world economy is BASED upon a source of plentyful CHEAP oil.
---obewan on 9/14/09


By the time we are dead, technology will have come up with new, more efficient uses of oil, new sources of oil, or better, viable alternatives to oil. Or a combination of all.

And that's why we will never run out of oil.
---ralph7477 on 9/14/09


Ok now you're scaring me Obewan. Oil I can do without, but no cookies!?

What am I going to have with my big glass of milk before bed every night? I'll never be able to get to sleep. Woe upon woe.
---ralph7477 on 9/13/09

O.K. I will concede. You and I will both be dead before the oil is gone, so we will have our cookies. However, by the time I am ready to retire I am convinced the "cheap" oil will be gone, so I am planning my finances accordingly. Rich people will probably still have cookies.
---obewan on 9/13/09




Ok now you're scaring me Obewan. Oil I can do without, but no cookies!?

What am I going to have with my big glass of milk before bed every night? I'll never be able to get to sleep. Woe upon woe.
---ralph7477 on 9/13/09


how many are "out there"?
---ralph7477

Why don't you tell us?

If they are not scarce why are they now so hard to find? Gulf Western spent $4 billion looking in just one year and only found $1 billion. The wells are more and more scarce and deeper and deeper, and the quality of the crude discovered is going down which effects both production yields and cost.

As for cookies, when the oil is gone so will be the wheat, flour, and cookies made from it. If there is any wheat at all they will focus on bread and not luxuries. And even the bread will depend of the existence of diesel for the delivery trucks. Of course, first will come years of $10 a gallon fuel and $6 or $10 bread loaves which will bring poverty.
---obewan on 9/13/09


I put this information on the blog before but perhaps it was overlooked.
WHAT IS THE FUEL OF THE FUTURE? After pondering this question over and over and even asking the Lord to show me the following event happened to me.
I was awakened from a deep sleep in the middle of the night and this thought was placed in my mind. The fuel of the future will be compressed air and then I went back to sleep.
The next morning I got on the Internet and searched it thoroughly. There is today in India a prototype car being built that runs on compressed air and it will quickly take the world by storm.
The compressed air will be produced by electricity and electricity will come from atomic plants up and down our waterways.
---mima on 9/13/09


"Even so, While we do from time to time discover new oil deposits (or find new technologies that let us exploit ones that we couldn't use before), this doesn't change the fact that there are only so many out there."

Ok then, how many are "out there"?
---ralph7477 on 9/13/09


ralph7477:

Ralph:

Your cookie analogy is fine, except for one significant point. There is no factory full of Keebler elves creating new oil out of nothing and pumping it into the ground for us to drill out. Oil (just like other mineral resources) is in the ground, and once we take it out, it's not there anymore. There is only so much of it to go around.

While we do from time to time discover new oil deposits (or find new technologies that let us exploit ones that we couldn't use before), this doesn't change the fact that there are only so many out there.

Even wood, which we can watch being renewed in our own lifetimes, only grows slowly, and it takes good care to make sure it isn't used faster than it is grown.
---StrongAxe on 9/13/09


That's like me predicting that the supermarket will run out of cookies if people keep buying them. I would also be right, up until a new shipment of cookies arrived. And as more cookies are sold, more cookies will be made available. You simply don't understand market forces.
--------------------------------------
What is not to understand about 2007 - 3% shortage, $4+ gas and 2009 - demand even, $2 gas? That is market forces, and supply increased because demand decreased.

Oil is not a cookie delivery. When a well is dry, it is not refilled. Unless you believe in that abiotic oil hooky that has been largely debunked.
---obewan on 9/12/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


"The Hubbert curve was applied to SPECIFIC KNOWN oil discoveries, not new unknown ones."

So what's the point then? That's like me predicting that the supermarket will run out of cookies if people keep buying them. I would also be right, up until a new shipment of cookies arrived. And as more cookies are sold, more cookies will be made available. You simply don't understand market forces.

You don't understand technology either. Oil that would have cost $10 per barrel to extract twenty years ago could now cost $2 per barrel thanks to technological advances. The first handheld calculators cost hundreds of dollars when they first came out. Now a T-34 costs under $20. Your theories are at odds with historical fact.
---ralph7477 on 9/12/09


Obewan, you sound plain silly. If the U.S. is out of oil, what are those wells in Texas pumping out of the ground?
------------------------
What Texas wells are you referring to? We only get a trickle of world supply from current U.S. sources. The Texas wells predicted to be depleted in the 1970's WERE depleted. The Hubbert curve was applied to SPECIFIC KNOWN oil discoveries, not new unknown ones. The known fields went dry as predicted.

In your favor, I won't dispute that shale oil and tar sands are examples of untapped reserves, but at what cost? $4 a gallon? $6 a gallon? $10 a gallon? The cost WILL go up as low hanging fruit disappears.
---obewan on 9/12/09


Obewan, you sound plain silly. If the U.S. is out of oil, what are those wells in Texas pumping out of the ground? What is all that liquid running through the Alaskan pipeline? If there is no oil, why isn't anyone allowed to drill? Ever heard of ANWAR? BP's Gulf discovery is just one of many new discoveries happening all the time. It's called technology. Explain how Persian Gulf reserves "grew" 10 times in thirty years.

The boy who cried wolf is a good example of alarmists past and present. They eventually become victims of their own foolishness. Then they disappear and everyone can once again live in peace without having to deal with their nonsense. Problem is there are always more "boys" who come along.
---ralph7477 on 9/12/09


Ralph, you can not tell me that the U.S. has NOT depleted its oil reserves. If there is not a limited supply, then why is the U.S. almost out of oil? Hubbert was considered insane by many, but WAS proven to be correct within a few months of his runout date.

And, HOW big is the "new" oil discovery you are trumping? A few billion barrels? How many barrels does just the U.S. use in one year?

In 2004, one of the big oils (Gulf-Western?) spent $4 billion on drilling and exploration and only found $1 billion in new oil.

With little doubt the low hanging fruit will soon be gone and only prohibitively EXPENSIVE oil will remain.
---obewan on 9/12/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


Obewan, are these "experts" the same kind of experts, such as a genius named Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist, who predicted back in the 1970's that we would see mass world starvation by the 1980's because we would all run out of food?
---ralph7477 on 9/11/09
While it is true some have been wrong, that does not liberate us to listen to your logic.

What we learned in childhood still applies. The boy who cried "wolf" was actually right at the end of the story!
---obewan on 9/12/09


Obewan, have you recalculated your date for when we will run out of oil yet, given the new huge discovery made in the Gulf of Mexico? The fact is, we will never run out of oil.
---ralph7477 on 9/11/09
It did not take me long with Google to find the answer to your question.

Your wonderful new bounty find is a whole 3 billion barrels of oil. However, they may only get a fraction of that since it is so deep that extraction may be VERY difficult.

The U.S. currently uses 7 billion barrels a year, so, yes, they have pushed the date out a whole 6 months! LOL

The low hanging fruit is rapidly disappearing!
---obewan on 9/12/09


Ralph: You left out the virtual certainty in the 1970's that an ice age was upon us. And who can forget Al Gore's prediction that by now the oceans should have risen 15 feet.

Reagan had it right. With energy, as with most everything else, "government is not the solution - it is the problem."
---jerry6593 on 9/12/09


Obewan, are these "experts" the same kind of experts, such as a genius named Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist, who predicted back in the 1970's that we would see mass world starvation by the 1980's because we would all run out of food?

Or maybe ecologist Kenneth Watt who predicted that the rate of nitrogen buildup in the atmosphere was such that light would be filtered out and land would be unusable. Funny we don't hear anything about nitrogen today. He also predicted that oil would be used up by the year 2000.

How about the Life magazine report that by 1985, air pollution would reduce sunlight by half and urban dwellers would be wearing gas masks to survive. Experts, yeah.
---ralph7477 on 9/11/09


Locate Church Jobs


We heard this same nonsense back in the 1970's. "The world is running out of oil!" Jimmy Carter warned that within 10 years we would not be able to import enough oil from any country at any acceptable price. Of course, 10 years later, oil prices tumbled to $10 a barrel.
---ralph7477 on 9/11/09
Apparently you have not read up on the Hubbert bell curve. He estimated resources in the US would run out in the 1970's, and he WAS correct within a very small error margin. His bell curve today is the benchmark used by the real experts in geophysics to estimate reserves. I will believe the experts before the SUV drivers who wish to make supply exist solely by declaration.
---obewan on 9/11/09


yes Donna yes. Native Americans used the Bison for food, clothing and general sustenance. However the Bison did not face extinction until the mid-1880's centuries after Indians had been established. How could you not know the mass slaughtering of the herds were part of an attempt to kill off the main food source for native tribes and thus rid the West of American Indians. It worked.

That is not even under debate though it won't be part of a high school history book due to a desire to whitewash and rewrite history. You'll have to find it in adult encyclopedias. The abuse of history by both liberal and conservative school boards who choose these books is shameful.
God bless Donna.
---larry on 9/11/09


"It is estimated that increased drilling can only increase supply by about 3%."
We heard this same nonsense back in the 1970's. "The world is running out of oil!" Jimmy Carter warned that within 10 years we would not be able to import enough oil from any country at any acceptable price. Of course, 10 years later, oil prices tumbled to $10 a barrel.

In the 1970's, the Persian Gulf was reported to hold some 74 billion barrels of oil. 30 years later the region was estimated to hold almost 700 billion barrels. How could this be? So, Obewan, have you recalculated your date for when we will run out of oil yet, given the new huge discovery made in the Gulf of Mexico? The fact is, we will never run out of oil.
---ralph7477 on 9/11/09


The high price of gas is not the fault of too much drilling, but too little. Without government meddling in the form of drilling restrictions, regulations and taxes, the free market would return the price of gas to the sub $1.
---jerry6593 on 9/11/09
We've had this debate before. It is estimated that increased drilling can only increase supply by about 3%. Waste accounts for far more than that. The reason the price went down to $2 from $4 is because we cut demand enough to match supply. People made drastic changes like eliminating 20% of airline flights, forming carpools, and taking public transportation. We can only agree that it is all supply and demand. Surely you realize that cutting demand increases supply and lowers price!
---obewan on 9/11/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Donna66:

Native Americans typically lived in harmony with their environment. If they needed meat, or leather etc. they would hunt, kill an animal, then live off it until it was used up.

This is in contrast with American sport hunters (typically of European, and mostly British desent) who would shoot bison indiscriminatly from moving trains, killing dozens or even hundreds of animals at a time, purely for sport, and leave their carcasses to rot without actually using any of them.
---StrongAxe on 9/11/09


obewan: Long time no hear from. How's that "force" holding up? I still vote for pagan earth worship. The high price of gas is not the fault of too much drilling, but too little. Without government meddling in the form of drilling restrictions, regulations and taxes, the free market would return the price of gas to the sub $1 range.
---jerry6593 on 9/11/09


larry---Off topic-- BUT what makes you think that "European immigrants" hunted the bison to near extinction? lol. (bet you attended public schools or university in the 70's or beyond) "Native Americans" used the Bison for food, clothing, implements and trade for generations. But ONLY "Europeans" were responsible for the Bison's near extinction?
---Donna66 on 9/10/09


Thank you moderator.
For one fossil fuels were created within the description in Genesis though we do not know how long (Genesis 1:2) the world stood without form whatever that means.

And to the point, reckless is reckless and it has more to do with economics than conservation and is certainly no part of an absurd suggestion concerning a pagan religion.

The wasteful use of fossil fuels, water or any other natural resource is a reflection of character and stewardship not whether someone is liberal or conservative.

The european immigrants who pushed west and hunted Bison to nearly extinction for no reason were probably conservative but that is not the reason for their stupidity.
---larry on 9/10/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Treatments


Fossil fuels will last until Jesus returns. All this green hype is nothing but pagan earth worship.
---jerry6593 on 9/10/09
Pagan, or good stewardship?

Apparantly you have not heard. Last year, gas was over $4 a gallon, and people who fed their families on less than $2 a day were forced to pay $4 a day for food. Millions of them did not have $4 a day for food, so they faced starvation and there were food riots due to shortages in many parts of the world.

What you say suggets that wanton waste should be allowed with no regard to its impact in terms of the poor and disenfranchised of the world.

I think God calls us to steward the limited resources he blessed us with. That is a Christian virtue not a pagan one.
---obewan on 9/10/09


Fossil fuels will last until Jesus returns. All this green hype is nothing but pagan earth worship.
---jerry6593 on 9/10/09


Steveng:

I'm curious where you get 10000-15000 years from. By connecting all the times between the "begats" and "he lived so many years, and then he died"s in the Bible, one typically gets a number somewhere close to 6000 years. Archbishop Ussher's chronology says that we're currently around 6012 past the start of creation, while the Jewish calendar says 5770 (less three weeks), just slightly less. On the other hand, those who do not insist on a literal reading of Genesis entertain much longer time periods.
---StrongAxe on 9/10/09


Ok, lets' reason this out some more.

Adam and Eve walked the earth somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 years ago. Let's say death came into the world about 10,000 years ago after the fall of these folks. Oil could not have been from fossils because that would mean animals had to die to make the oil.

By what some scientists now believe oil is natural occuring. There isn't enough plants and animals in all of time up til today to make as much oil as we have used so far (over the past 100 years or so).
---Steveng on 9/9/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


"Science says fossil fuels were built up over billions of years"

Not true! Many pseudo-scientists make such claims in order to support their religious beliefs, but many of us do believe in the random chance god of atheistic evolution. Mass spectrometer Carbon 14 tests of these fossil fuels (oil, coal) PROVE that they are exactly the age of the biblical flood (about 4500 years old). Where's the proof of the billion-year myth?
---jerry6593 on 9/7/09


obewan: "They last 10 times as long as a standard bulb."

That really depends. The more you switch it off and on the less life it has. When you switch the light on a surge of voltage breaks down the chemicals inside the lamp causing a shorter lifespan.

As for dispoing, most people will simply throw it in the trash causing envrionmental concerns.

It's going to be an interesting three years as governments around the world will force people to use CFCs (the USA and Europian countries have slated 2012), as more CFCs are being thrown in the trash, and as more people break them (spilling its mercury).
---Steveng on 9/6/09


jerry6593:

Yes, this is true - mercury has always been a nuisance with fluorescents of all types. Hopefully by the time incandescents are phased out, cheap LED bulbs will be available for household use.
---StrongAxe on 9/5/09


CFCs are a bad idea. They don't last as long as they claim (I've had some for years), they can spontaneously explode, and they contain mercury. So if you break one, you need a HAZMAT team to invade your home and clean up the mess (at a cost of thousands). I'm stocking up on incandescent bulbs for when they are banned in 2013.
---jerry6593 on 9/5/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


Thanx StrongAxe- it's the spiral ones that I break. I'll try some tubular ones.
---Donna66 on 9/4/09


Donna66:

I don't usually go by brand names, just whatever happens to be most economical at the time. I have a few unopened ones whose packaging says they're from a company named Greenlight (out of California). The bulbs are 13 watts and equivalent to 40 watt incandescent bulbs. They also come with a 9 year guarantee, something one would be hard pressed to find for incandescent bulbs. These particular bulbs are the type that have a spiral tube, I have also used ones in the past that have 2-4 "sticks", and I think those ones look more robust in terms of surviving a fall onto a hard surface (although I can't say for sure, since I've never broken one of either type).
---StrongAxe on 9/4/09


StrongAxe --- You kidding? The ones I buy are so fragile (or maybe I'm just a klutz) I wouldn't know if it took them a long time to burn out or not! I used to think they were a good idea, though they are more expensive.
They don't light instantly and never seem bright enough to me so I don't buy them anymore.
---Donna66 on 9/4/09


Psssst...Strongaxe! What brand of CFC's do you buy? Maybe I'm just buying the most cheaply made.
---Donna66 on 9/4/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Obewan:

Exactly! I was just pointing out that if they merely last three times as long, they already beat incandescent bulbs.

Donna66:

I have been using CFCs for about 6 years now, and in that entire period, I think I can only remember one burning out. Also, the glass shape seems much more robust and resistance to breakage from accidental dropping than round bulbs. I have never yet seen one break.
---StrongAxe on 9/2/09


mima ... How does the air get compressed?
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/2/09


Mima ---what kind of energy is used to compress the air? Most air-compressors are electric.

If the energy produced isn't more effective than the energy needed to create it....what is to be gained?
---Donna66 on 9/2/09


Necessity is the mother of invention!!!! Put to the test in this day and time there are many alternatives to using fossil fuel. However because of the financial structure and the greed to suck every dime out of the prison system big-money, big oil, and crooked politicians will keep this from taking place in the near future.

Here is a wild crazy scenario. Having put forth an effort to consciously think of a limitless supply of alternative fuel this happened to me. I was woken up in the middle of the night with this thought in my mind the alternative fuel that is clean, and abundantly available is compressed air. I then went to the Internet and read up on compressed air engines which are being tested today in India.
---mima on 9/2/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Steveng:

And yes, CFC bulbs may cost 3 times as much as incandescents with the same effective wattage, but if they last three times as long, it's the same cost per hour, and they use a lot less power to produce the same amount of light.

---StrongAxe on 9/2/09
They last 10 times as long as a standard bulb. The 15 watters I have put out 75 watts of light. I live in FL and don't need the extra heat. Every study ever done says hands down they are a major cost savings. I only have two bulbs in my whole home that are not CFL's. They are even made now to produce pleasant colors and good light.
---obewan on 9/2/09


Cluny-- I know that Chernobyl was in what was then the Soviet Union...now Russia. My apologies to any Ukrainians I may have offended. I also know it means "wormwood",
(referred to in Rev 8:10-11). Some scholors think this "great star" represents one of several important figures in political or ecclesiastical history...interesting, but beside the point.
---Donna66 on 9/2/09


Well, what do you know. Big headlines today: BP makes "GIANT" oil discovery in Gulf of Mexico. Isn't technology something. I say we celebrate by taking our SUVs on a big road trip this weekend.
---ralph7477 on 9/2/09


>>>>but if they last three times as long, it's the same cost per hour, and they use a lot less power to produce<<<<<

So much for propaganda.

WHERE can I find a CFC bulb that lasts AS LONG (never mind 3x) as in incandescent bulb? About half the ones I have bought break when you try to screw them in. Don't jar them in any way or the same thing happens.(And I don't immediately rush them to an approved disposal site when they do).
---Donna66 on 9/2/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


Steveng:

While a hot incandescent bulb saves money in reduced heating during the winter, it costs just as much extra in summer air conditioning. And yes, CFC bulbs may cost 3 times as much as incandescents with the same effective wattage, but if they last three times as long, it's the same cost per hour, and they use a lot less power to produce the same amount of light.

Mark_Eaton:

Chernobyl was such a disaster because like most Soviet technology, they saved money by skipping safeguards and backup systems used in western countries. Compare with the almost zero impact of Three Mile Island, where they estimate around 2 accident-related cancer deaths from radiation (well below deaths from smoking or car accidents).
---StrongAxe on 9/2/09


\\ The Chernobyl disaster occurred on the 26th of April 1986, in RUSSIA\\

Actually, it was in the Soviet Union.

And they area Chernobyl is in is Ukraine, not Russia. NEVER call a Ukrainian a Russian!

BTW--did you know that "chernobyl" in Russian and Ukrainian means "wormwood"?

And what is a star but a nuclear fusion reaction?

Think about it!
---Cluny on 9/1/09


The Chernobyl disaster occurred on the 26th of April 1986, in RUSSIA.

It was over 20 years ago in a coutry not even as advanced as the US was at the time. Do you think there have been no advances since then?

Most of the energy in France (and some other coutries) comes from nuclear power plants...when did you last hear of anyone killed or sickened by a nuclear energy plant anywhere?
---Donna66 on 9/1/09


StrongAxe: "CFC (compact fluorescent) bulbs are about 3 times as power-efficient as incandescents and last about 10 times as long."

You need to look at the absolute cost of CFC verses incandescents. My 60 watt incandescent bulb can leave my room warm in the winter without using the heater - and costs less than heating. Plus, a 60 watt incandescent bulb costs me fifty cents and the CFC costs $1.75 for the same wattage.
---Steveng on 9/1/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Thanks Strong_axe, I remember that quake well, I am from Ohio.

My point is that nuclear energy is the most dangerous of all. Talk to anyone from the Chernobyl region. They will tell you of the ghost town there now.

Do we think it cannot happen to us? Are we so sure that we will not fail at something like this?

The USA is ARROGANT and it bites us every so often. Look at the bridge collapse in Minnesota. If you told people one day earlier that this would happen, they would tell you the same thing Donna told me. "Never happen, safe as ever".

If you have any doubts, ask your children. They will tell you honestly, without political bias.
---Mark_Eaton on 9/1/09


Mark_Eaton:

In the mid-80s, when I was living in ohio, we had a 5.5 earthquake whose epicenter was under Lake Erie, 5 miles north of the Perry nuclear power plant. This caused some minor cracks in some external concrete walls etc. but did not cause any structural damage as such.
---StrongAxe on 9/1/09


Mark Eaton--
We do contain spent uranium now, quite successfully. Even the "disastrous" melt-down at 3 mile Island injured no one, yet it's called the "worst nuclear disaster in the US"
The chances of a 5.5 earthquake with an epicenter under a nuclear facility is probably less than your chances of being mauled by a brown bear in Florida. And nuclear energy has never caused "irreversable" damage to any land.

The pollution from other energy sources can and does aggrevate asthma and any number of other respiratory conditions (that's not considering any supposed damage to the atmosphere.)
---Donna66 on 9/1/09


I would try LED bulbs. If they give off pleasant light I don't see why I wouldn't use them. You can keep those fluorescent bulbs though. I'll use candles before I use those things. I'm not going to light my house with fluorescent light and feel like I'm living in a dentist office.
---ralph7477 on 9/1/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


I cannot imagine anyone recommending nuclear energy as the option for the future.

Are we so arrogant to believe that spent uranium can be "contained" by anything built by man? Do we seriously think we can harness this planet or this ecosystem. Remember the biosphere experiment?

Not many years ago people in the Midwest USA thought that California, Alaska, and Hawaii were the only states to have earthquakes. Until they had one, and a significant one.

All it would take is a 5.5 or greater earthquake centered underneath one of the nuclear "storage" facilities to cause irreversible damage to our land.
---Mark_Eaton on 9/1/09


ralph7477:

CFC (compact fluorescent) bulbs are about 3 times as power-efficient as incandescents and last about 10 times as long.

But why not use LED bulbs? These are now being used in cars, street lights, runway lights, etc. and should soon be available for home lighting. They're about 3 times as power-efficient as incandescent bulbs, give off virtually no heat, use no mercury (as flourescents do), aren't fragile and dangerous when broken (as both incandescents and fluorescents are), and last about 50 times as long.
---StrongAxe on 9/1/09


Donna, a largely unreported byproduct of these dumb and dangerous fluorescent bulbs is that the workers who make them in Chinese factories are becoming sick with mercury poisoning. Apparently to environmentalists, no price is too great to fight "climate change".

On the subject of nuclear energy, I think everything should be nuclear. If you can power a submarine with nuclear, certainly they can work on shrinking it down to a fuel cell that can power automobiles. Hey, the Terminator was powered by a nuclear fuel cell.

In the meantime, I'll stock up on good old Edison bulbs and bring them home in my new SUV which gets worse fuel mileage than my old one. We have to warm our cooling planet!
---ralph7477 on 9/1/09


Ralph7477 -- This is the same insanity that tries to "outlaw" incandsent light bulbs and mandate bulbs the leak mercury when broken...bulbs that OSHA requires Hazmat suits to clean up and dispose of if broken!

AlanofUK --So far nuclear energy is a good energy source. It is used almost exclusively in France. And our president encourages it in Iran. It is clean, efficient and non-polluting.
I don't know anyone who loses sleep over the impending decline of the human race.
---Donna66 on 8/31/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


Oil is naturally occuring - and not by vegetation and dinosours taking millions of years to create.

A compnay in the early 1990's started taking apart old oil wells because the wells have been completely dry for over twenty years. The company found that one of the supposedly dry wells was full again. Two scientist were brought in to investigate. After several years of study, they came to the conclusion that oil is not created as is thought. These scientist came to the conclusion that all the oil couldnot come from plants (or animals) because to make a barrel of oil would take as much vegetation as the area of South America.
---Steveng on 8/31/09


Ralph ... That makes our consumption even worse!

What is the answer? Nuclear energy? Or the decline of the human race?
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/31/09


Not so fast, Obewan. As reported in Reuters today: Hybrid cars gobble rare metals, shortage looms.

Evidently, the electric motors and batteries that power hybrid cars are using up the earth's supply of rare earth metals. It's estimated that demand will exceed supply by some 40,000 tonnes annually unless major new sources are developed. The rare earths most affected are neodymium, terbium, dysprosium and lanthanum. Wind turbines also use these elements. The Toyota Prius is described as the biggest user of rare earths of any object in the world and sales are increasing yearly.

How's that for humorous irony. Hybrids and windmills are depleting the Earth's natural resources. Talk about reckless.
---ralph7477 on 8/31/09


The recklessness is on the part of those who refuse to allow access to the vast untapped fuel reserves.
---ralph7477 on 8/31/09
What "vast untapped" resource are you referring to? The offshore oil that is currently "blocked" will only add about 3% to the current supply. That means we will run out of oil in 51.5 years and not 50 years.

Maybe you are thinking of oil shale. That will only cost about $6 a gallon or more if they ever get it going.

People who have their head in the sand and drive SUV's and claim an infinite supply are also reckless, but I will concede we need that offshore oil too.
---obewan on 8/31/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


It's debatable whether or not we are using fossil fuels recklessly. There are still great untapped oil reserves in the ocean and on this continent.

Nevertheless, this is a good time to work on developing alternative fuels. Natural gas is even much more abundant than oil, though it is technically a fossil fuel.

Wind and solar power are limited in their application. If fossil fuels are to be replaced, it must be by something cost-effective (this was what ethanol-from-corn was NOT) in addition to not depriving hungry populations.
---Donna66 on 8/31/09


Mod ... Yup ... But I think we are both wrong!

Material for the fossil fuels were created presumably by the dying animals and vegetation in the period between Creation & the Flood? Then the Flood redistributed them to where they are now.

In any case the strictly literal interpretation of the Bible talks about only a few years, whilst the scientific view (which is accepted by many born-again Christians) talks about billions of years.

My question was really whether those who hold the strictly literal view have the same concern about the rate at which the fossil fuels are being consumed.
---alan8566_of_uk on 8/31/09


\\
Cluny, the flood started the process - it did not end the process. By the way, they can make oil in the labs. It's just not cost effective yet.
---Moderator on 8/31/09\\

\\Moderator - Fossil Fuels happened during the flood. Is that the one day you are refering to?\\

If "fossil fuels happened during the flood", as you first said, then they were all made at one time during the flood.

Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways.

If their making was a process, why did it take longer for God to make them than to make the universe?
---Cluny on 8/31/09


Cluny, the flood started the process - it did not end the process. By the way, they can make oil in the labs. It's just not cost effective yet.
---Moderator on 8/31/09


Read These Insightful Articles About Distance Learning


If fossil fuels were made during the flood, it should be an easy matter to cook up more in any 40 day period.
---Cluny on 8/31/09


I don't recall fossil fuels being mentioned anywhere in the Flood story. Do you have a chapter and verse that mentions this?
---StrongAxe on 8/31/09


The recklessness is on the part of those who refuse to allow access to the vast untapped fuel reserves.
---ralph7477 on 8/31/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.