U.S. Military Orders Less Dependence on Fossil Fuels
 

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/05/sc...nted=1&_r=1&hp

In my opinion, this is probably the best thing that can happen for alternative energy. It all comes down to practicality and the US civilian population is not going to adopt alternative energy until it becomes practical to do so (cheaper or more convenient). If the military invests heavily in alternative energy, they will try to make it as practical as possible for them leading to innovations that will speed up the process of getting it to the civilian population.

Fixed that for ya Mr. Mabus

;)

That's awesome.

Unless I misinterpreted it, they are talking about the long run. The costs initially will be much higher, which is why the military is better for innovation than private companies in situations like this, but their advances will lower the cost in the long run for private companies.

JOKE JOKE JOKE

Sheesh - Is it the weather?

Since so many do not understand it, maybe you could explain it.

Nah. Nice thought though.

Gov't spending ... increased costs... $300 hammers...

C'mon even you aren't that ignorant.

If I had a $300 hammer...I'd hammer in the morning...I'd hammer in the evening...then I'd hammer my own face in.

:lol:

True, look what GPS has brought us.

Fear of innovation is a very conservative attitude. Change is evil. New is too liberal. But wrap that innovation in a defense budget, and extremist conservatives will promote it forever.

Nicely said, TW!

Can you guess which two renewable types provided most of that energy?





From here.

Very interesting HLJ. Wow solar only 1.32%....
I guess a big part of that is because they need other types of fuel sources more than electric.

WTF? Buy that dude a walker. :lol:

That's partly due to the capacity factor of solar, which ranges from about 13%, in the North East for example, to maybe 20% in Arizona.

Wind can be a little higher. Biomass, hydro and geothermal can be over 90%.

me dude? I'm not a dude.

tw was short and concise. I liked that.

I have no idea what you mean by your laughing suggestion for needing a walker. tho:mad2::blush::D

That should probably read, electricity sold, as it probably doesn't included what's generated and consumed privately.

Sorry about the "dude", Please insert "chick". :D

Now I feel like Mrs. Cleaver. Tea and cookies anyone?

More like Mrs Cleavage.

lol

I want to believe you are not clever enough to be calling me a boob.:mecry:

Not a boob, nor the other one, not June Cleaver, either. :headshake

And statements of this kind are how you maintain a reputation...

*


*


*


...as a twat. You can't bloody help yourself, you and your wacko extremism. Manners don't happen with you, do they.

Sky, you aren't looking any too good either, volunteering to be TWat's cheerleader. He seldom utters anything "well said." It is usually and pointlessly graceless instead. Turn your back on him.

UB shut up. or up yours or whatever. I don't care what any of the stinking opinions are.


Thanks bruce. I was a joke, but nice of you to say. ;)

June Cleaver is quietly clever. I LOVE her! ;)

That's completely ridiculous. I don't want my tax dollars going to $1000/gallon fuel.

<thud>

Just think, all the taxes you paid last year are being spent to fill up one truck, one time.

$116.4 billion a year for gas for the Marines in Afghanistan alone?

I've heard the Roman Empire fell when it overextended itself in unsustainable distant foreign wars. Hmm...

Almost 10 years in Afghanistan, and what do we have to show for it? Think if we had spent all that money on infrastructure here in the US.

I have hated this war from the beginning. I have been good about not caring anymore about what and who morons vote for, but this article jars me out of my apathy, in so much that I feel a little :greenface

In Iraq we were paying damn near that much, by the time is was trucked in from Kuwait, and selling it to Iraqi civilians for 15 cents a gallon, to keep them happy.

Damage control, isn't it nice. :mad:

Don't I remember someone posting that the military should take over some task because they could do it cheaper? Hah!

Find that.

You ought to, or enlightened -- non-, or counter-leftist -- thought shall never grace your mind. What a decay that would be. And that does not have to happen.

"Hating this war from the beginning" when it demolishes totalitarians is something I simply cannot do, out of my humaneness, which it appears you despise. The destruction of totalitarian less-than-democracy is always good for all mankind and womankind too. This is not a "stinking opinion," Sky.

All things being equal, you wouldn't have a problem with having a graceful mind, would you?

Grow a gracious mind for yourself and leave me out of your political and social machinating.

I am finished responding to you.

Hiya Sky... Hows things in Burbank? :3eye:

Well, I'm not exactly throwing darts at a map of Burbank,Ca YET ;)

I tried that already. Save yourself the trouble. I think its San Diego anyway. ;)

Sky, darlin', you're left behind the curve. I've already done so, and quite some time back. Note the urbane fashion in which I refuse to take offense at your sniveling snarling as evidence thereof.

This doesn't mean I can't call a spade a spade, a tool a tool, and an entrenching tool an etcetera. When someone utters a stupid or less-than-optional thought, I get to tell them what they did. As a general rule, I leave no one out. Insofar as I can.

Yes, I can become indignant. Even if it leaves me unappreciated among the trogs.

I don't even take refuge in Logical Positivism.

I also prefer to own that Ronald Reagan T shirt in the style of the popular Ché shirt, rather than the Ché. Or maybe this one. Same company.

Glatt, Glatt, Glatt. Am I wrong to wish you knew more about counterinsurgency?

Insurgencies take a long time to build, and long and continual social discontent before they become viable at all. (This was the thing the leftist radicals of the Sixties never understood. Sure, they felt discontented. What they never got was they were the only ones.) It takes a like period of time to turn a discontented society away from insurgency. It is an unmiraculous, daily-grind endeavor of small daily victories or losses.

You can find a lot more in indepth study of the subject, but that's the bumper-sticker version.

Cracking the nuts of freedom's enemies is not something I run out of patience with.

Fortunately, Petraeus is smarter than you, and could tell the difference between a counter-insurgency and an invasion. That's why he was able to rally the locals against the invaders in Iraq, and stop the madness, rather quickly.

Oh, I can tell the difference between an insurgency and an invasion just fine, thank you very much. And I don't hold blockheaded opinions of your sort, Bruce m'boy, now or ever. It's part of seeing to it that I am not a putz, nor likely to become one. When Bruce's opinions add up to rose fertilizer, don't expect me to share many of them.

You, Bruce, cannot hold a even a slightly lowered estimation of my intelligence except through great efforts of intellectual dishonesty. And what a waste of time that is. It is, I reckon, driven by the sorry ideology you find a satisfactory chart for your life's road. I would not find it so; leftist anti-right-ism is rooted in jealousy towards the talented and well-advised. The thoughts of invidious, collectivist, thieving shitbirds have no part with me, and I don't mind saying so.

You think I'm on the wrong road? You've never shown two important things to sustain that: where my road is "wrong," nor where your road is in any wise righter. What's more, I doubt you have anything to offer on either. Hemipygian. And all your gratuitous sneers cannot change any of that. You are simply not, and never shall be, superior enough to get that kind of thing done. I do not yield to the misguided.

Be sure and tell Petraeus he's wrong, next time he calls you for advice and consent. :rolleyes:

Having massively reduced the Iraqi standard of living in his seven months, then Bremmer cut out of town - secretly. Leaving a massive insurgency in Iraq that killed most of the 4,400 American soldiers. Your right. It took a very long seven months to create that insurgency.