Homz Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 That's my Roger Waters "Dark Side of the Moon" tour shirt. Damn thing cost $130. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KSG_Standard Posted February 28, 2009 Author Share Posted February 28, 2009 ... I've got to get that head photoshopped on to Forrest Gump running! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 The 3rd one fits u fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Make sure you get my good side. On that photoshop job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dem00n Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Lol...im going to bed before someone text me and i call them to piss them off. I hate texting. (nice glasses homz) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Man, you look just like Sarah Palin. You are one fine lookin' woman there, Homz...... Murph..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Man' date=' you look just like Sarah Palin. You are one fine lookin' woman there, Homz...... Murph.....[/quote'] Murph, Please for the sake of us all stop drinking. BTW where does your band play? Chicago isn't far. As long as it isn't country or rap perhaps the wife and I will come see ya play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudyH Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 China has 1.3 billion people and it is essentially a third world country with pockets of relative prosperity. Today, and for the next ten years, China is embarking on a major project: building more coal-fired power plants in China than exist in the entire rest of the world. U.S. policy and law has no influence on this. Meanwhile in the U.S. nuclear power is soon to make a resurgence. In Crystal River, Florida the plans are made and ground is almost ready to be broken for a new plant. The same is true in a number of other sites. The unfortunate thing about the "global warming" and "climate change" industry is that it transcends science. The current state of true science regarding global climate is summed up thus: If there is global warming, how will we know when we see it? Institutionally, climate change is a cash cow right now, making millions of dollars for hundreds of scientists and dozens of universities. This flow of money makes it palatable for many in the business to accept and even champion certain unfounded assumptions. Others in the publicity field have a vested interest in fomenting crisis because there is much money to be made. I won't say there is or isn't global warming, but in this intellectual environment, I am very skeptical of the motives of anyone arguing strongly for it. My biggest concern is financial rather than environmental. Does it really make sense to make incremental and minor changes in our energy policy at great cost while much of the rest of the world is increasing output of atmospheric pollution on a scale never seen before? The cost to us is great, with the "cap in trade" legislation essentially putting the government in a position of regulating industrial output and therefore our economy, and with each citizen paying a huge percentage of their energy costs in variations of a "carbon tax" that is likely to be used for purposes in no way related to energy. If we have a carbon tax, this will represent a significant revenue stream for the government. This is similar to the tobacco tax and gasoline tax we have now. Does it really make sense to believe that a government funding billions of dollars worth of projects through a specific tax on carbon fuel consumption will encourage development of alternative fuels that we must have to sustain our planet for the distant future? My inclination is to think that it will not. I am more inclined to believe that it will prolong the process of finding widely usable alternatives to coal, petroleum and natural gas. In any case, we should all be looking beyond the promise of the laudable ideal of maintaining a healthy planet to the downstream effects of the policies enacted to achieve it. If there is a carbon tax and a cap in trade, then what happens next? Specifically what will we get for all the billions of dollars we spend? After the Chinese have built their coal plants, what will it mean to their economy and ours? What will that mean to the environment? India has one billion people, with the number of relatively prosperous Indians approximately equal to the number of citizens in the United States. These people have energy needs and desires that are being developed quickly. Almost none of that consumption of energy is based on fuels alternative to carbon. What effect does that have on global pollution? My proposal is that we slow down in this frenzied and inefficient rush to save the planet and quietly develop some alternative fuels that are viable. It is a project like this, which might yield an energy technology usable by the rest of the world, that can make a difference. Even if we do have that alternative, there are powerful reasons for continuing to use carbon fuel. The greatest of these reasons is large supply and low cost. Consider the mathematics of a corn based ethanol plant versus a coal mine. Raising corn is done on what amounts to a two dimensional sheet of little thickness to produce a biomass that can be converted to energy. Carbon content is low. A coal mine is a three dimensional object containing almost 100 percent pure carbon that requires very little processing to convert to energy. Wind, water, and thermal "fuels" are great in concept, but are at best local enhancements to a more stable energy supply. Energy is a tough problem with many tradeoffs to be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homz Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Rudy, I can't say honestly that I read every word of your giant post, but I did see the mention of nuclear power. I know a bit about that and can tell you it is probably the most inefficient form of energy you could possible use. When people talk about it they don't tell you the facts. I'm not trying to talk down to you so I apologize if you already know this. The energy required to get the ore from the ground and separate the U235 from the over all U238 is enormous. U235 is less then 1% of the total (.07% to be precise). That process to separate the U235 required massive plants that use incredible amounts of energy. I suppose if they were to decommission weapons grad material they might find (or already have) a way to use that, since we've already expended the energy to enrich the Uranium or have converted it to Plutonium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RudyH Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Homz: Yep, I know how it works. I used to work in the nuclear fuels department of a power utility. It's coming back because it's cost-effective and clean. The Europeans, with the French in particular, have vastly improved the plants, and the new U.S. plants look to them for inspiration. The new US plants, will, however, maintain the relatively large size of historic US plants whereas the French plants are relatively small. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myspace.com/jessenoah Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 france gets approx 70 percent of its power from nuclear plants the U fuel is recyclable, the coolent water is not (or maybe its the other way around) in any case, you are left with some pretty crappy leftovers, but the fuel is effcient and clean. i wrote a reseach paper on it for science this year Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluemoon Posted February 28, 2009 Share Posted February 28, 2009 Hey Blue..... You're an idiot..................... Get over it..... Do you own any land? Paid for? An SUV maybe? A business? You're a NOTHING.................... Murph. What is wrong with you. Is that the only insult you know? Grow up Murph and act your age. And for the record,... I do own land, quite a bit of it. I don't own a business, but my wife does I own a Saab and a Jeep Wrangler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.