Deranged Rhino Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 That would mean burning dolphins, so the idea would never sell. First of all dolphins won't burn because they are wet. Secondly they are fish. Squish the fish. Duh! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 What kind of energy do lefties like? Oil: Nope Fracking: Nope Nuke: Nope Coal: Nope Solar: Yup Wind: Yup Some freakish weirdo algae growing monstrosity: Yup Imaginary cold fusion: Yup Corn: Yup Burning garbage: Yup Star Trek Warp drives: Yup Basically if it works, they hate it, if it doesn't they love it. In order to save the world from global warming all humans must die? I have nothing against animals but let's face it mammal farts are causing a big chunk of the gasses that are blamed for fake global warming. I don't want anything to die but before we change out energy sources and kill ourselves how about we kill off all mammals so that humans may live? Somebody is going to burn that Canadian oil. It night as well be us. You forgot hydro power which people like for it's low cost and the recreation that it provides like riding barrels over the falls. Now if the left were smart they'd realize that it's downhill all the way from Canada to the gulf which means that flow of oil would cause enough hydraulic pressure to spin a whole bunch of generators along the way. Slap some taxes on all that and you've got a real winner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 You spelled butt wrong in the title to this thread. That is some funny shitt right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 It's simple. It's all a matter of economic viability. If it's viable - it will flourish - if not it won't. That's why most of the money being spent on alternative energy sources should not be on the subsidization of projects that aren't viable but much more so on the R & D. You'll get a much better bang for your buck. If a new energy source was discovered/ refined/ created and it was viable, there would not have to be tax credits and government loan programs to get it off the ground... Companies would be muscling each other to get it to market and build infrastructure around it. But you're right on, just because we want a clean renewable energy source doesn't mean we have one to incent its development. Somebody will formulate the disruptive design on energy and oil will be running for its life... It's only a matter of time, but it's sure isn't gonna be congress and the POTUS doing the heavy lifting... Just muddying the waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts