Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Conspiracy Theories
Saudi press said U.S. blew up World Trade center
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dgiharris" data-source="post: 70000511" data-attributes="member: 322579"><p>Actually, if you calculate the number of miles the average person drives at one time, then electric is a superior options. The Kia electric has a max range of 93 miles. The Tesla electric has a max range of 240 miles. Obviously the Tesla is costly but my point is that for 95% of the time, an electric meets our needs. 95% of us 95% of the time drive less than 93 miles per day. </p><p></p><p>A shift in focus to pure electric (obviously hybrid is a stepping stone and part of the process) would yield tech breakthroughs and economy of scale and clever work arounds.</p><p></p><p>For instance, what if there was a super quick removable battery for your electric. So you are driving cross country, you make it 200 miles on your first charge, pull into the electric battery refuel station, and a machine automatically swaps your depleted battery for a fully charged one, and presto, you are good for another 200 miles instantly. Driving cross country, there is no stretch of road that is 200 miles from a gas station...</p><p></p><p>In any event, until we actually try, we just won't get over our oil addiction. Technologically speaking, we are at a point where we really should move wholeheartedly in that direction. Truth be told, the powers that be really aren't incentivized to. They will be dead before our current environmental problems overwhelm us. Basically, why should all the old cronies who control the world try to fix it before they die? They have no incentive and can deny deny deny all the global warming models. And I say that as a former scientist who is not sold on global warming, however even I have to acknowledge the possibilities and the risk vs reward to the arguments claiming we need to clean up our act. </p><p></p><p>THen there is the matter of nuclear technology which is a superior form of technology that we just have failed to fully explore and develop. It is criminal that the majority of nuclear reactors are basically 1960s technology and design. Imagine if we used computers that were 1960s design and technology... If we honest and truly pursued nuclear technology and could get over the emotional arguments and logical fallacy arguments that are rooted in fear and ignorance.., this world would be an amazing place. </p><p></p><p>I find it ironic, you tally up all the environmental harm done by oil spills and chemical spills and frakking, etc etc and it is a about a billion times worse than nuclear accidents. And I don't use the number billion as a turn of phrase. No, I literally mean a billion times worse. And yet, we can't get behind nuclear. Or ignorance in regards to all things nuclear is so blinding that we can't see the truth and potential benefits staring right in front of us...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dgiharris, post: 70000511, member: 322579"] Actually, if you calculate the number of miles the average person drives at one time, then electric is a superior options. The Kia electric has a max range of 93 miles. The Tesla electric has a max range of 240 miles. Obviously the Tesla is costly but my point is that for 95% of the time, an electric meets our needs. 95% of us 95% of the time drive less than 93 miles per day. A shift in focus to pure electric (obviously hybrid is a stepping stone and part of the process) would yield tech breakthroughs and economy of scale and clever work arounds. For instance, what if there was a super quick removable battery for your electric. So you are driving cross country, you make it 200 miles on your first charge, pull into the electric battery refuel station, and a machine automatically swaps your depleted battery for a fully charged one, and presto, you are good for another 200 miles instantly. Driving cross country, there is no stretch of road that is 200 miles from a gas station... In any event, until we actually try, we just won't get over our oil addiction. Technologically speaking, we are at a point where we really should move wholeheartedly in that direction. Truth be told, the powers that be really aren't incentivized to. They will be dead before our current environmental problems overwhelm us. Basically, why should all the old cronies who control the world try to fix it before they die? They have no incentive and can deny deny deny all the global warming models. And I say that as a former scientist who is not sold on global warming, however even I have to acknowledge the possibilities and the risk vs reward to the arguments claiming we need to clean up our act. THen there is the matter of nuclear technology which is a superior form of technology that we just have failed to fully explore and develop. It is criminal that the majority of nuclear reactors are basically 1960s technology and design. Imagine if we used computers that were 1960s design and technology... If we honest and truly pursued nuclear technology and could get over the emotional arguments and logical fallacy arguments that are rooted in fear and ignorance.., this world would be an amazing place. I find it ironic, you tally up all the environmental harm done by oil spills and chemical spills and frakking, etc etc and it is a about a billion times worse than nuclear accidents. And I don't use the number billion as a turn of phrase. No, I literally mean a billion times worse. And yet, we can't get behind nuclear. Or ignorance in regards to all things nuclear is so blinding that we can't see the truth and potential benefits staring right in front of us... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Leisure and Society
Hobbies, Interests & Entertainment
Conspiracy Theories
Saudi press said U.S. blew up World Trade center
Top
Bottom