Another Massive GREEN Failure...New York Replacing Hybrid City Busses Engines with Diesels.

Bob wrote:

Markle wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

2seaoat wrote:The truth is that diesel technology is constantly improving and is getting cleaner, and its unit cost is less expensive.  Even with the amply CNG now available, the improving diesel technologies are getting cleaner.  

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/829622-k8LC2V/native/829622.pdf


It would help if you give links rather than mixing a political agenda to a simple trend in technology.   Not very honest.

Diesel exhaust has always made me sick...boats, cars, trucks, etc.  

And Markle is never honest.

I'd suggest you hole your breath.

PLEASE STEP UP and share with us what I posted which is NOT TRUE.  Or are you going to admit that you are lying...again?

Did you mean "hold"?  I suggest you "hold" your breath until a truthful word passes your slimy lips.

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

Yes you hit a nerve and you're still hitting it.  And no the profanity got nothing to do with big and tough.  It happens whenever I see such a smart person let assholes do his thinking for him.   You and teo just piss me off.

Look at your fucking chart.  We used to import 25% of this fucking shit and over time that's grown to over 60%.  It's hundreds of billions of dollars of our wealth leaving the country every fucking year.
And then here you are putting up this fucking chart which shows it but you think the chart says Obama hussein.
And you can't understand why I cuss?

Markle wrote:

Bob wrote:

Markle wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

Markle wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:

2seaoat wrote:The truth is that diesel technology is constantly improving and is getting cleaner, and its unit cost is less expensive.  Even with the amply CNG now available, the improving diesel technologies are getting cleaner.  

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/829622-k8LC2V/native/829622.pdf


It would help if you give links rather than mixing a political agenda to a simple trend in technology.   Not very honest.

Diesel exhaust has always made me sick...boats, cars, trucks, etc.  

And Markle is never honest.

I'd suggest you hole your breath.

PLEASE STEP UP and share with us what I posted which is NOT TRUE.  Or are you going to admit that you are lying...again?

Did you mean "hold"?  I suggest you "hold" your breath until a truthful word passes your slimy lips.

“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”
― Socrates

Yes you hit a nerve and you're still hitting it.  And no the profanity got nothing to do with big and tough.  It happens whenever I see such a smart person let assholes do his thinking for him.   You and teo just piss me off.

Look at your fucking chart.  We used to import 25% of this fucking shit and over time that's grown to over 60%.  It's hundreds of billions of dollars of our wealth leaving the country every fucking year.
And then here you are putting up this fucking chart which shows it but you think the chart says Obama hussein.
And you can't understand why I cuss?

President Barack Hussein Obama has done all he can to reduce the amount of oil we produce and that which we buy from friends.
Foul language is childish.  So I consider the source and it helps evaluate the speaker.

TEOTWAWKI wrote:So Markle and I piss Bob off.....I still have a reason to live.

Markle wrote:ZVUGKTUBM  is just too easy!  After a while you'd think he/she would learn....  DO YOUR RESEARCH AT PLACES OTHER THAN THE HALLS OF PROGRESSIVISM!  

TRUTH of the matter is that oil and gas production from FEDERAL LAND (that's land controlled by President Barack Hussein Obama) is DOWN. [i] Oil and gas production on PRIVATE AND STATE LANDS IS UP.





To make matters worse, President Obama is NOT finished destroying out country.



Page added on June 24, 2013


Obama Administration Cuts Oil Development on Federal Land
Public Policy

The Obama administration is calling for cutting the amount of federal lands open for oil shale and tars sands development in the Western states, a plan that industry officials say may force companies to look overseas for opportunities.

A new Bureau of Land Management plan calls for allowing 700,000 acres of land for development, reports Fox News. This is a drastic cut from the Bush administration, which had set aside 1.3 million acres, and the oil industry is outraged by the change.

2seaoat wrote:http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=us&graph=production

This clearly shows that oil production in the United States hit bottom in 2008-2009 it has been shooting back up Since the President has been in office with some remarkable gains in production.   Now If you were running a grain elevator which held a million bushels of corn, and there was a bumper crop which was dropping the price of corn, are you going to dump all million bushels into the market, or are you going to very conservatively manage your asset to get the best return.  Oil leases have been notoriously low as industry insiders move from the government into the private sector.   It certainly makes sense to me to maximize government assets at a time when overall productivity is reaching new highs.   We are not a third world country to be exploited by the oil industry as they drain our natural resources and pay pennies on the dollar on leaseholds.   We are finally doing a much better job of managing those assets, and in particular not flooding the market with leaseholds which artificially lower the price of the same.   By the President cutting the number of leaseholds going out to bid, simply supply and demand will take place.   These actions are being done at the very same time that we have a boom in oil production......some folks on this forum need to talk to a farmer coop and learn how they operate their grain elevators.......the United States government should  maximizes our national resources.....not giving them away to special interest groups who are now squealing like a stuffed pig as they realize America is going to maximize our oil leases and get fair prices.   The threat of production companies going to some other third world country to exploit their resources provides America with cheaper imports, which in light of our rapidly expanding production makes them even cheaper.   Smart management of our resources.......that is a good thing.

Bob wrote:I'm just too simple a person for conspiracy theories,  Pkr.  They're just way to complicated and convoluted for me.

My simple mind sees two fundamental explantations.

1.  Solyndra was a failure because it wasn't the shareholders' money being put at risk.  When the taxpayers are absorbing the risk it can and will usually be too risky.

2.  Solyndra was given taxpayer money for the same reason most businesses are given taxpayer money.  Because it's payback to the principals in the company for helping to get the politician votes.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:ZVUGKTUBM  is just too easy!  After a while you'd think he/she would learn....  DO YOUR RESEARCH AT PLACES OTHER THAN THE HALLS OF PROGRESSIVISM!  

TRUTH of the matter is that oil and gas production from FEDERAL LAND (that's land controlled by President Barack Hussein Obama) is DOWN. [i] Oil and gas production on PRIVATE AND STATE LANDS IS UP.





To make matters worse, President Obama is NOT finished destroying out country.



Page added on June 24, 2013


Obama Administration Cuts Oil Development on Federal Land
Public Policy

The Obama administration is calling for cutting the amount of federal lands open for oil shale and tars sands development in the Western states, a plan that industry officials say may force companies to look overseas for opportunities.

A new Bureau of Land Management plan calls for allowing 700,000 acres of land for development, reports Fox News. This is a drastic cut from the Bush administration, which had set aside 1.3 million acres, and the oil industry is outraged by the change.

We have had this argument before on the old PNJ forum..... The shale formations in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado your sources refer to are not the same as the shale formations in North Dakota, Texas, and Pennsylvania where oil and gas development are booming. There is no technology available to develop those formations.

Obama is doing nothing to impede oil development in North Dakota or Texas, or gas development in Pennsylvania. This graph proves it:



Oil production continues to grow under Obama, no matter how much you hate it, Markle!

Markle wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:ZVUGKTUBM  is just too easy!  After a while you'd think he/she would learn....  DO YOUR RESEARCH AT PLACES OTHER THAN THE HALLS OF PROGRESSIVISM!  

TRUTH of the matter is that oil and gas production from FEDERAL LAND (that's land controlled by President Barack Hussein Obama) is DOWN. [i] Oil and gas production on PRIVATE AND STATE LANDS IS UP.





To make matters worse, President Obama is NOT finished destroying out country.



Page added on June 24, 2013


Obama Administration Cuts Oil Development on Federal Land
Public Policy

The Obama administration is calling for cutting the amount of federal lands open for oil shale and tars sands development in the Western states, a plan that industry officials say may force companies to look overseas for opportunities.

A new Bureau of Land Management plan calls for allowing 700,000 acres of land for development, reports Fox News. This is a drastic cut from the Bush administration, which had set aside 1.3 million acres, and the oil industry is outraged by the change.

We have had this argument before on the old PNJ forum..... The shale formations in Wyoming, Utah and Colorado your sources refer to are not the same as the shale formations in North Dakota, Texas, and Pennsylvania where oil and gas development are booming. There is no technology available to develop those formations.

Obama is doing nothing to impede oil development in North Dakota or Texas, or gas development in Pennsylvania. This graph proves it:



Oil production continues to grow under Obama, no matter how much you hate it, Markle!

As you know, and are loath to admit it even to yourself, the increase is due to oil and gas production on private and state land and NOT on Federal land.  Even faced with FACTS you make a futile effort to twist and revise the FACTS.  President Barack Hussein Obama is doing EXACTLY as he promised.  Cause pain and suffering in the low and middle income households forcing them to depend more and more on government for their survival.  I know you are so proud.

Please don’t worry about your electricity bills.  President Barack Hussein Obama has it ALL UNDER CONTROL for you!

Obama: We are 5 days from FUNDAMENTALLY transforming America
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cqN4NIEtOY

President Barack Hussein Obama Says- Americans Want Higher Gas Prices
http://tinyurl.com/2d3vd2f

Obama:  My “Cap and Trade” plan will necessarily cause Electricity Rates to Skyrocket
http://tinyurl.com/dkbowv

Obama says he will bankrupt the COAL INDUSTRY!  San Francisco Gate Interview January 2008.
http://tinyurl.com/yh2va37

ZVUGKTUBM wrote: (cue the Socrates quote....)....

Bob wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote: (cue the Socrates quote....)....

rotflol

Markle wrote:

Bob wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote: (cue the Socrates quote....)....

rotflol

I do enjoy it when the Progressives here are faced with facts and the truth and they sound like an old record stuck in a grove repeating the same falsehood over and over.

ZVUGKTUBM refuses to admit he is wrong about oil and gas production by posting the same misleading chart.

You, on the other hand, sing the praises of the failed green electric cars.  Vehicles, which will be feasible, when we have the same type storage capabilities for electric that we have for water.

As for the cars themselves....

This research is from BERKLEY...can it get any further to the far, far LEFT?
From UPI

Technology

Study: Electric cars no greener than gasoline vehicles

Electric cars, despite their supposed green credentials, are among the environmentally dirtiest transportation options, a U.S. researcher suggests.

Published: July 1, 2013 at 4:51 PM

BERKELEY, Calif., July 1 (UPI) -- Electric cars, despite their supposed green credentials, are among the environmentally dirtiest transportation options, a U.S. researcher suggests.

Writing in the journal IEEE Spectrum, researcher Ozzie Zehner says electric cars lead to hidden environmental and health damages and are likely more harmful than gasoline cars and other transportation options.

Electric cars merely shift negative impacts from one place to another, he wrote, and "most electric-car assessments analyze only the charging of the car. This is an important factor indeed. But a more rigorous analysis would consider the environmental impacts over the vehicle's entire life cycle, from its construction through its operation and on to its eventual retirement at the junkyard."

[...]

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Technology/2013/07/01/Study-Electric-cars-no-greener-than-gasoline-vehicles/UPI-40741372711871/#ixzz2Xy2DurU4

Bob wrote:There's one thing for certain,  markle, and it's something that completely escapes you and that motorhead you linked.  No coal plant will ever dump a million tons of liquid coal into the Gulf of Mexico which fucks up the marine life and washes onto our beaches.  Just like no coal plant will ever do what the exxon valdez did either.  Or what the next one is gonna do.

Markle wrote:

Yep, stuff happens and all is well again.

Floridatexan wrote:
http://www.therationalmajority.org/snap-facts/snapfact211-thetruestoryaboutpresidentsbushsandobamassolyndrainitiative

"Let’s face it; we are living in a topsy-turvy time. Perhaps Justin Hayward, lyricist of the Moody Blues “Nights in White Satin”, put it best in their 1967 tour-de-force Days of Future Past LP.

“Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion?”

Today, it is the “Right” that decides that illusion trumps facts in their reality.

It’s baffling that Facts have become either irrelevant, or worse, they are flipped like a cheap coin so the heads is tails and tails is heads. The Solyndra saga is just one of the many sad examples of the illusionary tactics of the right wing.

The word about Solyndra is out and about as though this is President Obama’s biggest flub and is the single thing that should drive him from office. Surely the President has some culpability in this mis-adventure, but there is more to the song than the discordant tune that is being played these days.

The true story is much more interesting than the made up one we are hearing. Let’s examine the facts:

Solyndra was a solar energy company that designed and manufactured solar panels for the commercial rooftop market. Solyndra systems were designed to provide the lowest cost of electricity and the highest kilowatt hour production. After a very promising start they declared bankruptcy in 2011. The main reasons for the failure were that the average cost per kilowatt hour, which was the basis of the company’s marketing advantage, dropped precipitously from $3.30 to $1.00. Another main contributor was the aggressive “dumping of illegally subsidized Chinese product on the market. Both of these factors were unforeseen and out of the company’s control.

The company was widely regarded as an innovative and well respected business. Some of their many accolades included:

Solyndra was named one of the world’s “50 Most Innovative Companies” in 2010 by MIT’s Technology Review and included in the Wall Street Journal’s “The Next Big Thing: Top 50 Venture Backed Companies.”

Private investors, after conducting their own careful review of Solyndra, put $1 billion of their own private capital behind the company. Solyndra reported sales growth of 40% from 2009 to 2010, from $100 to $140 million.

• This loan guarantee was pursued by both the Bush and Obama Administrations.
• The Solyndra loan underwent 3-1/2 years of rigorous internal and external review before being approved. It attracted venture capital support and was thoroughly vetted by objective, independent validators who believed this project was worthy of investment.

Although you wouldn’t know it from today’s headlines, the Solyndra story started in 2005 under the Department of Energy loan guarantee program devised under the Bush administration. Solyndra was a startup company at that time. The Solyndra loan application was submitted in December of 2006 and by 2007 congressional Republican Senators began to push for the 2 year program to get going. This push was still on in 2010 as witnessed below..."

(timeline follows)

The Department of energy sums it up succinctly. “When it comes to clean energy, we have a choice to make. We can compete in the global marketplace – creating American jobs and selling American products – or we can buy the technologies of tomorrow from abroad”.

The quote continues. “Our loan programs are today supporting a diverse portfolio of more than 40 projects that plan to employ 60,000 Americans and give us a chance to compete and succeed in the global clean energy race. These include the largest wind farm in the world, the first new nuclear power plant in the United States in three decades, and the largest solar generating stations in the world”.

“Historically, our government has supported emerging industries -- from transcontinental railroads to aviation to the microchip. These investments strengthened our Nation and leveraged the private investments that drove our prosperity. Now is not the time to stop investing in our Nation’s future”.

Solyndra is only one of the investments that the Obama administration has made in the clean energy field. By September of 2011 the Department of Energy had an investment portfolio that reached $37.8 billion. Given that Solyndra was their only failure to date, that would account for 1.3% of the budget being written off to bad debts – an enviable record by any standards..."

Bob wrote:Yes the disposal of nickel metal hydride batteries does pose an environmental hazard

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

My future solar array (Dow PowerHouse Solar Shingles):