If you support Alternative Fuels but drive a Gas Car you are a hypocrite

[Indenturedebtor]

Plain and simple.

It doesn't matter if you actively campaign for the change over to alternative fuels, or for public transportation. If you burn petroleum you are living a lie!

Oh but you're too worried about getting to work so that you don't end up homeless you say? What ever happened to the principled stand for the sake of the principled stand!?!?!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is how I view a lot of the "Obama didn't do this! Obama did that impure thing so I'm not voting for him."

Just like the rest of us sometimes you have to burn a little dirty fuel to get to where you're going. Now you don't have to drive a Hummer, but we need to try to understand a little bit if he has to rent a Moped for a little while.

[Xipe Totec]

1. I guess I don't support alternative fuels then

Happy now?

[DJ13]

2. .......

:thumbsup:

[ChairmanAgnostic]

6. especially since a hybrid is 10-15,000 MORE EXPENSIVE TO BUY

[styersc]

15. Neither will Obama if it means getting a few votes.

[Super Soaker Sniper]

18. I never have supported alternative fuels.

There are alternatives for producing electricity like wind power, solar, nuclear but no feasible alternative to fuel transportation. None and there will not be one.

Oil does not have to be manufactured. It is in the ground and all that has to be done is to tap into it. An expensive process, but there is no manufacturing of oil. Any alternative (as we found with ethanol) has to be produced, manufactured. To manufacture it you will need raw materials, chemicals and a process. We use millions upon millions of gallons of fuel a day. Where is the alternative fuel going to be manufactured? If only one or two centers are producing it then there will be huge transportation costs. In the end, an alternative will cost much more than what we are using now.

I cannot see these obstacles changing to where an altrernative could even be more than just a cool idea.

[Indenturedebtor]

19. Have you looked into algal biodiesel at all?

Or read the rest of the op? ;)

But seriously google algal biodiesel you might be pleasantly surprised.

[Super Soaker Sniper]

38. Yes, Algal Biodiesel is one of the unfeasible alternatives.

There are some pretty insurrmountable problems with it.

1. Water evaporation, trying to limit the algae contamination from other species, keeping the CO2 richness of the atmosphere intact.

2. Permitting, since most plants would have to depend on non-native species, the enviromental impact of introducing a foreign species would have to be studied. How long would this take and it is doubtful that a permit would be granted at all.

3. The cost of the bioreactors. To replace even the out put of a small petroleum refinery you would need hundreds of square miles of bioreactors.

4. The current high oil yielding alge does great in a laboratory but not so good in an open pond. The hardier more common species of algae produces only 2%-3% that the laboratory kind do.

5. Seperating algae from the water is expensive and very energy intensive. It also involves adding chemical or biological factors to aid with the seperation which adds to the cost.

[Indenturedebtor]

39. Many of these issues are close to being addressed

http://www.unh.edu/p2/biodiesel/article_alge.html

How much do new refineries and all the shipping we do from overseas cost?

Where does that money go?

There are a lot of solutions to these issues if our government got behind it. We could for example work with the oil companies by forcing them to invest 50% of their profits in building algal oil plants across the US.

The paper above estimates that it would cost about 300 billion for initial setup to replace all oil requirements at current rates of consumption. After that it would be about 40 billion a year for upkeep. We currently send upwards of 150 billion a year overseas for oil.

I think it's quite feasible.

[Super Soaker Sniper]

40. The Estimates are on What Has Been Produced in a Lab.

The biodiesel species like Botryococcus braunii are called "micro algae". They grow well in a lab and will take a lot of effort to grow in open ponds where evaporation will be a huge diesel. If someone came up with a mico-alge species that was sturdy enough to grow in the open ocean without being taken over by other species, do you think that Enviromental Groups would allow it?

Would you be in favor of forcing McDonalds and Burger King to invest in a marketable typewriter that would take again it's rightful place in offices aross the country and take over a marketshare from the wordprocessor? Both McDonalds and Burger King make huge profits. I would not be in favor of it because that is not what they do.

The government has no right to dictate to any industry what it may put it's R&D money into. Algal biodiesel seemed like a good idea on paper, once the concept was acted on the problems inherent with it became clear. The Japanese firms who were pouring the most money into it realized they had an albatross and abandoned the projects.

If this is such a good idea, the Government should fund and develop it then. If it actually worked, then the Government would have a readymade nationalized industry that they could manage. I would preffer that than forcing companies into a situation that will swallow up billions and not produce anything.

It may not be the best solution, but oil is the cheapest most efficient fuel and any alternative will be much more expensive.

[Indenturedebtor]

46. As I said I don't support growing this algae in the open

Bioreactors are the way to go.

The McDonalds and BK example is different. How we handle our energy industry is a national security issue, in much the same way as we dealth with the Steel and Automotive industries during WWII.

I would agree that nationalisation would be the best way forward but would people accept it?

Would any fuel be more expensive than what we're paying for oil now? I doubt it. Especially if we implement new hybrid technologies etc.

The lab is where these sorts of things start. Proof of principle. And in the lab algal biodiesel is feasible.

[Fresh_Start]

3. so if we waste electricity to spend time on DU

what type of hypocrite does that make all of us?

[sshan2525]

5. Yep guess I'm a hypocrite too......

But you seem so concerned that I'm sure you'll be happy to loan me the money to buy my brand shining new electric car. Thanks!

[Fresh_Start]

9. but you can't have a new car either or ur a hypocrite

because reuse is better for the planet than any new

[DinahMoeHum]

4. The perfect is the enemy of the good-enough-for-now.

also known as the "Nothing-But-The-Best-For-The-Oppressed" Syndrome.

:evilfrown:

[99th_Monkey]

7. When I can buy an old junker that burns alt. fuel, I will.

since all I drive are older used cars that I can actually afford to pay CASH for, alt. fuel-burning cars are not
available to me, well, not yet anyway. *sigh*

[Connie_Corleone]

8. Do people even bother to read past the subject line anymore?

Good Grief!!

[Bobbieo]

13. No. they don't bpther to go past the subject line - which is often missused for shock value.

[Indenturedebtor]

21. Shock value yes but part of the point I was trying to make

It is pretty funny how folks won't read more than two sentences though!

[TreasonousBastard]

14. Apparently not...

gotta get that reply out and reading just wastes time.

[Buck Rabbit]

20. shhhhhhhh .. drats .. too late

I was calculating the percentage of "readers" versus "rapid responders" and you ruined the purity of the sample!

[saracat]

10. What a pathetic comparison. To compare those with zero options to someone

with choices? To compare those who have NO voice and give them the same obligation as a person with a bully pulpit? What absolute apologist nonsense in defense of unacceptable positions. No matter who the candidate is, we have an obligation to demand the best from them and they have an obligation to live up to their own "message".

[Indenturedebtor]

16. I hate to bring up the primaries

But I seem to remember you embracing Clinton's "compromises".

The point is that some battles have to be waged after one has the power to do so. He didn't change his stance on the FISA bill, but he didn't expend all of his political capital on it either. But I think that some of your wanderings on the internets are illustrative here:

Actually I'm not going to x-post your stuff from hillary sites.

But please go read your own journal about "Marching in lockstep" etc.

I don't agree with what he did on the FISA bill, but I still have hope that when we're in power they can pull the fangs out of this legislation. It sickens me but I can still understand the choice that they made here.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

17. Saracat disapproves strongly of something Obama is doing.

Quel surprise.

Were you this upset when John Edwards voted for the USA Patriot Act?

[saracat]

29. I was upset that anyone voted for it. This apples and oranges. Give up the primary wars and live in

the NOW!

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saracat]

32. Really? I suggest you get a life. Thanks for the rec though!

[mrreowwr_kittty]

33. Okay, we'll make a deal

I'll get a life and you stop being a bald-faced lying hypocrite. Deal?

[saracat]

34. If you agree not to apply different standard to different Dems we do. Hypocrisy cuts two ways.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

35. I don't.

I think Obama should have showed up to support the filibuster. As should have Hillary.

[saracat]

37. Good for you! I agree.

[rodeodance]

44. ha ha you are obsessed with that site.

[quaker bill]

23. No one is pure

Candidates do not have a "bully pulpit", pretty much the exact opposite is true. Presidents have the "bully pulpit", interestingly, "bully pulpit" is a term coined by a sitting President, not a candidate.

Candidates have to go about proving to the various constituencies that they are sufficiently pure to warrant support. There are many constituencies that have to be gathered in order to win, yours is only one of many. Expecting more than that will only result in disappointment, candidate or party is not relevant to this as it is essentially true for any candidate with actual hopes of victory.

Ralph Nader, on the other hand, can be as pure as he wishes, simply because he has no hope or intent of winning.

[silverweb]

11. Very good analogy.

Not everybody is happy with Obama's position on this FISA bill. Many want "blood" from the telecoms and BushCorp right now (cue the waaaambulance) -- but that's just not going to happen.

Watch his comments again at yesterday's presser in Chicago:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbZcEQrEKEw

Obama's primary concerns for making the executive branch accountable and restoring the FISA court's role are entirely appropriate. As Jonathan Alter said on KO last night, the current bill is restoring the Constitution in this respect.

Even as our nominee, Obama is still just a "junior senator" and his role is limited. As president, he'll be able to accomplish a lot more.

I'm quite content with his current position on this issue for now.

[Bill219]

12. Jonathan Alter was on with Randi Rhodes this afternoon...

And explained the whole situation.

As it stands right now, the US has been operating unconstitutionally when it comes to wiretapping and eavesdropping since last year.

At the time of the vote that we were all upset about, the Dems were given or shown reports and intelligence that the Capitol was a suspected terrorist target and they voted as such to protect themselves. This vote was supposed to be a temporary measure and was meant to be reviewed again after the threat had passed.

Bush has basically has carte blanche since last years vote to do what ever he wanted without having to consult the FISA court.

If this vote succeeds then the power goes back to the FISA court.

[silverweb]

22. That's exactly my understanding.

With this bill, the power is taken from the executive and returned to the court, where it belongs. That's the primary goal.

After our nominee actually has won the "bully pulpit" -- as someone else here called the position he does not yet have -- then he can work on further refinements.

As I recall, Senator Obama has said multiple times that an immediate priority of his presidency would be to review all BushCorp laws, signing statements, and executive orders for their constitutionality and overturn those that compromise or defy our Constitution.

Works for me. :thumbsup:

[QueenOfCalifornia]

26. Very good analogy?

You must be kidding.

It is obtuse.

I have read the OP over and over and it is confusing.

If this was somehow related to the FISA bill it did not come across. Not to me.,

I have sent several emails to Obama about how fucked up I think his support of the new and improved FISA bill is. I am disgusted. But how in the hell did this OP translate to you about it being about FISA?

[QueenOfCalifornia]

24. Uh... Bull fucking shit

Not all of us have the cash to go and by an electric car to make you happy.

Fuck off.

One more lecture and finger wagging is what I need on this message board.

DO YOU HAVE 2 KIDS AND A MORTGAGE?

My husband commutes on a trolley every day to go to his job. I need my gasoline powered engine car to go where I need to go. So... I am now not allowed to be part of the special "real liberal club"

Get a grip and quit being my evil mother.

[Indenturedebtor]

25. Read the whole op please ;) n/t

[QueenOfCalifornia]

27. I have read it

and I am willing to confess it is not sinking in. I am sort of tired today and busy but The OP (for me today) is confusing. I apologize if I am being slow today. Maybe I need a nap.

I always apologize when I make a stoopid post.

[Indenturedebtor]

31. My post count would triple if I did that!

Basically just trying to make the point that sometimes we do have to go with the least evil we can find in order to get where we need to go to survive.

[cliffordu]

28. If you claim to be an environmentalist and drive a car you are a

hypocrite.

[Tim4319]

36. How about those of us that cannot afford to by a new car?

I'm sorry if I am a hypocrite, but I am currently unemployed and I need a car to go back and forth to my interviews. By a car that is equipped with alternative fuel solutions is pretty low on my list of priorities right now. Not to mention, suburban Atlanta is not well equipped with public transportation. So, I am not exactly within walking distance of bus or train stops.

[lefty2000]

41. That is a stupid Statement

Not everyone can afford to buy a new car just to make a political gesture.

[Th1onein]

42. I HATE these kind of bullshit, black and white, no middle ground idiotic statements.

SOME people can't afford to buy a new car at all, got it? They are STUCK with gas cars.

[and-justice-for-all]

43. Oh really? Then give the 16,000 bucks I DO NOT HAVE..

to buy a fucking hybrid.

[silverweb]

45. It looks like your point has been lost on some people...

...who really do think you're talking about cars here.

[Thothmes]

47. Does this mean

those folks that drive alternative fuels vehicals that use petrolium based oils and lubricants are also hypocrits.

[papapi]

48. This thread is nothing more than bullphooie.

[ileus]

49. Buy me an all electric 70mile @ 70mph and I'll send my accord to the crusher.

until then since I have a job I will be driving my accord every day.

[ccharles000]

50. I support alternative fueled cars but can not afford them.

Right now I would rather see corn on my table than in my car.