BUSH RULES!!!! AND SO DOES HIS INTERIOR SEC./Wanderer
BushCheater
coast. I wouldn't eat any of the fish caught around rigs. I wouldn't eat any
animal harvested from the Gulf coast! Have you found any two headed ones? What
about the frogs they have found in the inlets that are deformed? Can you say
mutation? I certainly hope it smells better in Alaska than it does in
Houston---pollution capital of the United States (Okay, so they periodically
trade places with LA). Oh, and when the oil companies do have spills and
accidents, they pay fines for it. That is a slap on the wrist but irreversible
to the environment. What about that black tar you get on your feet when you
go to the beach? Is that naturally occurring? Today's Houston Chronicle had
an article about how the cases of asthma and allergies have increased
tremendously in the schools in the past few years. Could it be the AIR? You
also should realize the greatest impact on the environment is people. Start up
industries and you bring in people. You change the culture, the population and
the whole scope of what an area once was. (Look at Houston.) I believe it was
Fulbright who coined the phrase "Fatal Impact". Could it be you are in the
oil industry and enjoy your pay? I know it probably wouldn't bother you at all
to disturb and destroy whatever flora and fauna you would have to keep your
lifestyle intact because you believe you are so much more important than what
nature has given us. Do you have children? I do and I would like mine, and my
future grandchildren to at least be able to go somewhere beautiful even if they
can't live there. And I'm not talking about Disneyland or watching a movie as
in "Soylent Green" (haven't thought of that one in years!) Your comparison of
Alaska with the Gulf coast was nauseating and your reduction of the Ethiopian
culture mindless. I would be willing to reduce my luxuries if I knew that it
would help the environment. I don't think you would. Hey, just charge a
couple of extra dollars on each and every pro sports ticket and you could pay
for alternate energy. The oil industry would fight you tooth and nail with
alternate energy though. They have too much to lose.
"You people" reminds me of politician from Dallas.
Well, if you want to call me a treehugger--go ahead-- you greenback hugger!
As far as your statement about the majority of Americans feeling as you do--if
how a majority of Americans felt in a recent election didn't matter, why should
YOUR majority matter now?
Oh, and Hiway, the moniker I use was in use before the shrub came along. It
refers to an exhusband. ;>)
Jim Moschner
What about that black tar you get on your feet when you
go to the beach? Is that naturally occurring?
Same ole icky stuff on the beaches of Mississippi. btw, good post. Janie
hiwa...@my-deja.com
That was a powerful post! Never heard the term "greenback hugger"
before... I like it!!!
Regarding the source of your moniker... er... I understand.
Best,
Hiway ((o;
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
wand...@gulfcoast.com
desperate tactic of a person who does not know his facts I prefer to
clarify facts. So here they are.
First let me tell you about myself. I live on the Gulf almost midway
between Corpus and Galveston and have been an avid fisherman here for
over 30 years. Yup I'm in my 50's and can see the gulf out my front
window. I know the waters from Corpus to New Orleans like the back of
my hand. I have nothing to do with the refineries or petro chemical
industries, Won't work the plants because they are to dangerous and
they do give off pollution. Instead I'm the electrician at our city
airport. Pays less but I feel better about it.
You are absolutely correct about Houston, you forgot however to
include the entire Galveston Bay. One of the most polluted waterways
in the world. I certainly would consume nothing taken from Galveston
Bay or within 15 miles of the bay outlet. However this is one of only
a couple of pollution hot spots in the Gulf. Corpus is another one
for the same reasons.
Where does the Galveston Bay pollution come from? Crashing barges and
fuel spills mostly. The occasional spill from a petro chemical plant
(very rare) and plant discharges both air and water. Also run off
because all the storm drains run to the bay. You can watch the ship
channel day or night and it's a parade of barges and ships. Some old,
some new and in different stages of repair. The channel is narrow and
it seems like someone is always running aground and spilling something
toxic. Surrounding the bay it is solid refineries and petro chemical
plants so I think you get the picture. After a good rain the bay is a
solid sheen from the street run off. This has been going on since the
1920's so you can imagine what it's like.
If you will reread my post I said nothing about putting a petro
chemical or oil refinery in the Alaskan sanctuaries. What I said was
that as long as it is done properly oil exploration and drilling CAN
be done without spilling and pollution. They do it everyday here in
the gulf. Both deep water and shallow water wells. Where do you think
most of your natural gas comes from? These are off the coast and ANY
oil would show up immediately as a sheen on the water. I'm out every
weekend and usually on my off days and I haven't seen a sheen let
alone a slick in over ten years. I also SCUBA dive and the old rigs
and pumping platforms are the best places to see fish concentrations
and marine life.
Back in the 50's it was different. There were spills and disasters.
But they have gotten it down pretty good now so they don't mess things
up any more.
I believe they can do it just as well in Alaska as they do it here.
And personally I'd rather not give my money to Saddam Hussein.
So if that makes me a "greenback grubber" well I guess I've been
called a whole lot worse.
Laura
>But they have gotten it down pretty good now so they don't mess things
>up any more.
Now the Galapagos. How sad.
They say the oil is sinking down onto the ocean bed and killing the algae which
feeds the smaller fish which feed the bigger fish which feed....
the food chain right on up to us.
And we can do nothing to stop it now.
They can clean off the top oil, which is usually the only part of the spill
that gets
media attention, but this algae cover is
devestating..
> I believe they can do it just as well in Alaska as they do it here.
>And personally I'd rather not give my money to Saddam Hussein.
And Hussein is back in the news, too.
Sad....
Laura
wand...@gulfcoast.com
>>There were spills and disasters.
>>But they have gotten it down pretty good now so they don't mess things
>>up any more.
>
>Now the Galapagos. How sad.
>They say the oil is sinking down onto the ocean bed and killing the algae which
>feeds the smaller fish which feed the bigger fish which feed....
>the food chain right on up to us.
>And we can do nothing to stop it now.
>They can clean off the top oil, which is usually the only part of the spill
>that gets
>media attention, but this algae cover is
>devestating..
>
you are absolutely correct. This is a major environmental disaster.
But you forgot to mention something. This is a rusty old third world
registered freighter that ran aground. It is leaking diesel fuel. That
is causing an even worse disaster because, your right, it kills the
algae that is the basis of the food chain.
But this has nothing to do with Alaskan Sanctuary oil exploration.
Laura
>registered freighter that ran aground. It is leaking diesel fuel. That
>is causing an even worse disaster because, your right, it kills the
>algae that is the basis of the food chain.
>But this has nothing to do with Alaskan Sanctuary oil exploration.
I wasn't saying it truly had something to do with it.. just bringing it up.
Although I do wonder how we can prevent this type of thing from happening more
often. I would think the ol' rusty ship had
to pass some sort of seaworthy test prior
to this accident.
It's scary, since it IS an accident.
They THOUGHT this wouldn't happen.
Laura
Laura
your email is not working, it says no such server...
wand...@gulfcoast.com
Laura once again I totally agree with you.Surprised?
Here is the problem. When a ship gets old and marginal they register
it in the Bahamas's, Liberia or numerous other "flag's of
convenience".
These countries have NO regulations, inspections or anything. These
old ships then travel the world, primarily to third world countries
carrying all kinds of cargoes. The crews are uneducated generally and
ofttimes the officers even speak a different language than the
sailors. the ports they visit once again have no standards for
inspection other than far to often a quick bribe. These ships cause
the vast majority of disasters when they run aground.
These ships are not allowed typically into American ports because
they could not meet our safety standards. Yet they constantly break
down, run aground and cause damage all over the world. Typically when
this happens the ship is just abandoned where it sits because it costs
more to savage than it's worth. Plus it's owned through three dummy
corporations and nobody really knows who it belongs to. Insurance?
what insurance?
Until the international maritime commission finds a way to force some
international standards of condition and seamanship on these ships we
will continue to see these kinds of things happen. Because however
this is a major source of easy revenue for these countries, don't look
for them to go along with it any time soon.
wand...@gulfcoast.com
>Hey Wanderer..
>your email is not working, it says no such server...
>
Your right, because I got flamed and mail bombed several times for
posting my politicaly incorrect opinions
I changed it in my profile.
It's a shame I had to do that but I felt I had no choice.
>
Laura
LOL! No! Seeing that I've not been arguing with you or attempting to..
I have tried to email you, tho.
Whats up with that? ;o)
Laura
Laura
Well tell me how to contact you so I can
tell you about a book you might be interested in...
And if I mail bomb you or attack you can print it right here.. I promise.
;o)> Your right, because I got flamed and mail bombed several times for
Laura
before you think I'm too strange..
I just have to ask if you are the same
guy that posts on my ancient worlds group?
I don't post there, but I use it to gather
info for homeschooling.
I've read some of your posts there, and
they're good!
If you've been around here long, you know
I homeschool and that this year has been
been on Ancients in history class..I'm not
snooping around on you, I'm actually on
that ng!
Laura
BushCheater
even Sargent?
I have been involved in the Beach Cleanups there at Matagorda.
I have noticed in your other postings you use the same line about name calling
etc. or popping bubbles about others not knowing the facts. I only used the
name calling in response to yours. But that is beside the point. The point
is, we are faced with an administration that is lead by an "oilman" from Texas.
An opportunist who has now been "given" the reins of the country to do as he
sees fit (or how his advisers see fit--watch and notice how he and Karen Hughes
have the same facial reactions and quirks!) What frightens me most is, yes,
they may have gotten it down pat here in Texas now (since the 50's) but they
haven't even scratched the surface in Alaska. (And look how polluted we are!)We
can't afford to screw up Alaska. I have a dear friend who was a principal in
Barrow, Alaska for two years and his description of what oil money has done to
the native is irreprehensible. Their culture has been all but destroyed, they
have the highest incidence of alcoholism and drug addiction anywhere. Now, you
may not see anything wrong with this as not many saw anything wrong with taming
the frontier and the Indians. But Alaska is all we have left of a pristine
land and our last chance to act like a civilized society. I simply don't trust
this government to do it the right way---they didn't want anything else done
the right way--oh okay--maybe the RIGHT way. Did you understand what I meant
by Fatal Impact? It is when a culture is infiltrated by outsiders and the
whole economy of the culture is turned inside out. When money is poured into
a culture it changes the hierarchy--the culture is never the same afterward. I
don't know that I want that on my conscience. Not only that, but the native
people of Alaska don't trust much anymore. Sure they have had a lot of money
thrown at them, but, and I know this might be hard for some to understand,
money isn't everything when you consider what you are losing. Wanderer, I just
don't trust this lucky guy who became our president. He has been lucky all his
life, fallen into the right holes and come up smelling like roses. Luck
doesn't last forever. I think he will think first of how to repay his donors
with favors that look like they are benefitting the whole country when, in
fact, they will be our downfall. Wanderer, he was our governor and surely
you know where we rank with education, health care, poverty and pollution.
Does that not tell you anything?
Personally, I would rather Hussein destroy his own home than us destroy our
homeland to avoid him. After rereading your post again, I think you are
actually proving my point.
Diamondsnstones
>eat any
>> animal harvested from the Gulf coast! Have you found any two headed
>ones? What
>> about the frogs they have found in the inlets that are deformed? Can
>you say
>> mutation? I certainly hope it smells better in Alaska than it does in
>> Houston---pollution capital of the United States (Okay, so they
>periodically
>> trade places with LA). Oh, and when the oil companies do have spills
>and
>
daily. I watched the Snook that used to be stacked like firewood in the inlets
disappear, the Manta Rays were gone , the large sails and Marlin began to show
signs of tumors and cancers. The schooling fish were diminished and the
ommercial fishermen's nets were almost empty. In fear and desperation we banded
together and passed laws and suspended the taking of some fish and we enforced
them. Now the fish are returning. The sewage that used to be dumped into the
sea is gone and there are stiff fines for spilling or pumping bilge water into
the sea. It isn't near enough but it is a start and start the leisure fishing
community did as did the boating community. It is in our hands, the legacy to
our children and grandchildren.
We must take the reins and go with it.
Sue
allth...@ftc-i.net
fishing became terrible. After this was stopped, the fish returned. My husband
used to catch snook off of John's Pass Bridge (on the Gulf of Mexico) that weighed
in at 20 or 30 lbs., but that was back in the 50's and 60's. Even then, you were
only allowed to catch so many snook. Believe it was 2 or 3 a day. There has
always been a limit on snook. I also remember Tampa Bay as being one of the most
horrible smelling bays back in the 60's. I was pregnant and having to drive from
St. Petersburg across Howard Franklin Bridge, to get to McDill AFB in Tampa for my
checkups. I just about lost my cookies everytime I smelled that water. It was
awful. I don't know what they did to clean it up, but it smells much better now.
Course, if the tide is low, you are always going to have a smell to a certain
degree, but this smell was coming from the water itself. They must have stopped
whatever was being dumped in there. Even the color of the water looked better
after it was cleaned up.
Best,
Dot
Diamondsnstones
>only allowed to catch so many snook. Believe it was 2 or 3 a day. There has
Dot Now there are closed seasons on Snook that didn't exist and the size limit
has gone up but I was mainly talking about the schooling fish that may no
longer be taken in nets and were totally closed for some time and limits were
placed on the taking of these fish. Redfish, Sea Trout, grouper, snappers and
others. Yes the waters are improving and I thought all was lost but the tumors
and the cancers are still there and there are some fish you would not eat if
you saw what it takes to clean them. Love, Sue
allth...@ftc-i.net
eventually sold out (for a good piece of money) and the area that now takes you to
the Sunshine Skyway Bridge (as you are heading out of St. Petersburg) was his land
at one time. He was no longer able to catch the fish that he needed to make his
living with and feed his family. Really, those waters were over-fished and limits
had to be put on the amount of fish that were being caught. When my husband fished
out in the deep Gulf (he went out on a charter boat as a first mate when he was
young) they would come back with quite a lot of sailfish, grouper, snapper,
kingfish, mackeral. Back in that time, they were not seeing cancers and tumors on
the fish that they were catching. That must have come later on. They were seeing
the fish diminishing, though. From what we heard, it got much worse years after we
no longer lived in Florida, too.
One fish that was netted a lot was mullet. I don't believe there was ever not an
abundance of these fish, but I could be wrong. I can still taste "smoked mullet"
from a wonderful place in St. Peteresburg called "Ted Peter's Smoked Fish".
Yummy. We went back years later to have some, but it did not taste nearly as good
as it did years ago. Could have had something to do with our "older taste buds",
though!
Anyway, I was so glad to no longer smell that icky smell coming from Tampa Bay.
Have no idea what the fish are like that they still catch out of Tampa Bay,
though. I know they used to have their big tarpon tournaments out of there, but
they are sport fish and to my knowledge are not eaten.
Best,
Dot
Diamondsnstones
coast but the mullet on the Left coast of Florida are different and are eaten.
The place your friend's dad owned is a wonderful spot and I know it well. Many
of the commercial fishermen are now out of business because the fish simply
disappeared. 'The Japanese came into our waters and simply netted everything,
even if it were undersized. It ruined the fishing fields and one had to go
further and further afield which simply caused the boats to be too expensive to
operate. I love fresh fish and moving from Fl caused the loss of one of my
dearest loves. My son who fishes those waters still says the new restrictions
and the government exercising their powers in our waters has dramatically
caused the fish to recover. The sewage outfalls have been closed and now the
water outlets for the nuclear plants are regulated so they do not put radiated
water back into the sea. It is a slow process but the pressure from fishermen
and environmentalists is working. We may eat that wonderful fish from our youth
yet again before our lives are over. Love, Sue
allth...@ftc-i.net
(smoked) was very, very good. We used to sit out on my friend's dock and catch them
off of there. They would take just about anything!
I am glad to hear that things are becoming better as far as the fishing goes. It
is good that the fish are returning and things continue to be cleaned up. Wouldn't
it be wonderful to eat that sweet tasting fish yet again!
Best,
Dot
wand...@gulfcoast.com
After all those nice things I wish I could say yes, but unfortunatly I
can't. Though I do read that newsgroup I don't believe I've ever
posted to it. At least I don't think so.
wand...@gulfcoast.com
>Let's see, Wanderer. Would that put you somewhere around Matagorda Bay? Maybe
>even Sargent?
Actually I'm in a little town called Seadrift. Just south of Port
Lavaca. Find Port O'Conner then look on the other side of the
Peninsula.
I agree with about 90% of what you are saying. Absolutely GW was born
with a silver spoon. As A Vietnam vet I sometimes resent that he got
to play with jets over Texas while I was in the Mud getting shot at.
But that's just the way life goes. Darn, if my daddy had only been
named Rockafeller. But I digress.
Where I am coming from is my belief that if done properly and
carefully, drilling can be done with minimal impact on the
environment. I base my beliefs on what I have seen here and also in
the Louisiana swamps. Whenever your cruising around there your always
seeing gas platforms all over and none of them seem to have impacted
things. I defiantly would NOT have said this 50 years ago. In my
opinion this can include IF DONE CAREFULLY the Alaskan areas.
Cultural contamination is a whole other subject. We all know what
happens when one culture meets another. No matter what, the less
dominate culture is corrupted and usually destroyed. One is going to
dominate. I kind a hope the aliens don't show up in their space ships
while I'm alive.
We all know that eventually we are going to run out of petroleum. We
have to go to other fuels. They are out there. We The People have
chosen not to use them. We do not convert our cars to propane even
though it's a completely proven and easily available fuel. Methane
comes from rotting vegetation like garbage.
I admit to selfishness. I want to delay the turmoil that is going to
happen when gasoline costs $15 per gallon. I have no desire to live by
a wood fire no matter how efficient my stove is. I guess I am selfish.
It still boils down to economics.
I would love to hear from some posters in Alaska. Those who actually
live there. I know I hear from friends who have worked there for long
periods that many are resentful that something like 96% of Alaska is
owned by the feds. Any Alaskans out there? What do you have to say?
Laura
>posted to it. At least I don't think so.
>
Nah, you must have.. or I coulnd't have
guessed that you read it.
Actually, I think what you did was demanded the correct kind of proof from
someone spouting off lies..
Oh well, it might have just been one or two
posts, and I've never posted there..
Laura
Pamela Beasley
> Where I am coming from is my belief that if done properly and
> carefully, drilling can be done with minimal impact on the
> environment. I base my beliefs on what I have seen here and also in
> the Louisiana swamps. Whenever your cruising around there your always
> seeing gas platforms all over and none of them seem to have impacted
> things.
You don't understand.....this area in Alaska is one of the few areas on
this earth that is still untouched by man. It doesn't matter whether
the impact is minimal or not-----impact is impact. I would like to have
atleast one place left UNimpacted by the presence of man. The money
that it would take to drill the oil in ANWR should be used to help
develop these alternate fuel sources. And to those who complain that it
would cost too much and etc., just how much will it cost us if we fail
to develop another way when we do run out of oil?
Pam
Siriannew214
>this earth that is still untouched by man. It doesn't matter whether
>the impact is minimal or not-----impact is impact. I would like to have
>atleast one place left UNimpacted by the presence of man. The money
>that it would take to drill the oil in ANWR should be used to help
>develop these alternate fuel sources. And to those who complain that it
>would cost too much and etc., just how much will it cost us if we fail
>to develop another way when we do run out of oil?
>
>Pam
>
Well said, Pam! I agree.
peace and love,
Siri
BushCheater
part that worries me. We are recovering from an election that wasn't "done
right" so you have to understand how gun-shy many of us are. One of the
biggest reasons we have not gone to alternate sources of energy is because oil
is big business in itself. Our president is a selfproclaimed oil man. Do you
see any future for an industry that would replace his donors' well being? It
hasn't suited the powers that be to push an alternate form. From what I have
seen of this leader, as governor of my state, and the short time he has been
president, is he is your typical "good ole' boy" fun to be around and real
personable. Just about every former coach-turned-principal in Texas has the
same skills he does. WIN WIN WIN. Whatever the means. I just don't have a lot
of confidence that the environment, women, or for that matter, education will
win with this administration. Remember, the first Bush was the "education"
president too.
wand...@gulfcoast.com
Let's face it, we learned finally in the 60's that it was time to stop
messing up our home so much. We have a local very popular fish here we
call red fish. When we realized they were in danger, WE encouraged a
ban on catching them. Texas Parks and Wildlife worked with us for
several years until they had a chance to build up their populations.
Now most of us still catch and release them but we will occasionally
keep one.
I am also not loved by some of my neighbors who are bay shrimpers.
After SCUBA diving a couple of days after a shrimp boat drag had gone
through I saw what the bottom looked like. Wiped clean of everything.
Changed my attitude towards bay shrimping completely. I don't buy
brown shrimp. Brown shrimp are the wild bay shrimp. I will not buy
them, period. I either buy large deep water shrimp or white shrimp.
White shrimp are aqua farm shrimp.
I also boycott Swordfish. Swordfish have been to de pleated. They
must have time to rebuild from the gross over fishing. Please, do NOT
buy swordfish either at the store or at a restaurant.
So contrary to what some choose to believe I am very much the
environmentalist. But I also believe I try to add a little reason to
my beliefs. I hope so anyway.
Look elsewhere in this news group and perhaps you will better
understand where I come from.
"Question The Obvious"
On 25 Jan 2001 06:44:39 GMT, diamond...@aol.com (Diamondsnstones)
wrote:
C Reck
pregnant women should avoid due to very high mercury levels, and swordfish
was among them. SInce mercury is a carcinogen, it would probably be wise
for everyone to avoid eating swordfish until they test for safer levels.
Colleen
<wand...@gulfcoast.com> wrote in message
news:3a73ae9c...@news-server.austin.rr.com...
wand...@gulfcoast.com
<pamela....@airmail.net> wrote:
>wand...@gulfcoast.com wrote:
>
>> Where I am coming from is my belief that if done properly and
>> carefully, drilling can be done with minimal impact on the
>> environment. I base my beliefs on what I have seen here and also in
>> the Louisiana swamps. Whenever your cruising around there your always
>> seeing gas platforms all over and none of them seem to have impacted
>> things.
>
>You don't understand.....this area in Alaska is one of the few areas on
>this earth that is still untouched by man. It doesn't matter whether
>the impact is minimal or not-----impact is impact. I would like to have
>atleast one place left UNimpacted by the presence of man.
I respect where you are coming from but I guess we'll just have to
recognize that we have different opinions.
The money
>that it would take to drill the oil in ANWR should be used to help
>develop these alternate fuel sources. And to those who complain that it
>would cost too much and etc., just how much will it cost us if we fail
>to develop another way when we do run out of oil?
>
>Pam
Pam, the technology is already here. It is already developed. WE
meaning you and I choose not to support it by buying it. I use propane
as my best example. I could have my pick up converted to dual fuel
propane/gasoline or LPG/gasoline for approximately $1500 in most major
cities. my vehicle would then give off so little pollution it could be
run in an enclosed building safely.(like forklifts in a warehouse are
today). It would virtually eliminate smog. my engine would last
250,000 miles. Have I done it? no. I still run on gasoline. Why? I can
give you a million excuses, none of them very good.
BushCheater
>meaning you and I choose not to support it by buying it. I use propane
>as my best example. I could have my pick up converted to dual fuel
>propane/gasoline or LPG/gasoline for approximately $1500 in most major
>cities. my vehicle would then give off so little pollution it could be
>run in an enclosed building safely.(like forklifts in a warehouse are
>today). It would virtually eliminate smog. my engine would last
>250,000 miles. Have I done it? no. I still run on gasoline. Why? I can
>give you a million excuses, none of them very good.
> It still boils down to economics.
>>
>>
>
Oh, come off it Wanderer. It is NOT readily available--if so the manufacturers
would already be installing on cars and shipping them to showrooms. You also
don't see a lot of propane tanks at the usual refueling (gas) stations. Heck,
when I need propane for my grill, I have a hell of a time finding a place that
sells it and finding one that is open. I am telling you the oil industry
doesn't want the technology to be readily available--think of how much they
have to lose. It does boil down to economics and it is economics in which
we, the general public, have no control. You live in Texas (somewhere--I did
find a post where you were defending Houston politics and another where as a
fellow Austinite you were welcoming Sandra Bullock--no big crime but you do
seem to fit your moniker!) You know how it is in Texas, especially if you
lived through the big oil bust. The "good ol' boys" stick together--and the
environment is not their big concern. People who defend the environment are.
And I'm curious, are you like me--a native Texan? Not that that amounts to a
hill of beans!
wand...@gulfcoast.com
Defending Houston Politics? No I doubt that was me because I don't
know anything about Houston Politics. Austin? yes that was me.
Absolutely. I lived there for years and my son still lives there. I
also still have a house there I rent out. I like a lot about Austin.
Now when I got older I opted for the simpler life and moved to
Seadrift. about 3 1/2 hours away. Been coming here for years and
finally found just the right place for me.
Non availability of propane? Look around. They even have it here in
Seadrift. Sure it's not at every corner. The reason is that not enough
is sold to justify it. Same with LPG. I am just as guilty if not more
so than the next guy. I have not converted my truck. If you look in
the Austin yellow pages you will find several places that do
propane/gasoline conversions. I checked the yellow pages and there
are even two places in Victoria thirty miles away from me.
In Austin I believe most of the smaller city busses run on LPG. Many
of the city trucks run on propane. It makes good environmental and
economic sense. If you go to your local Ford or Chevy truck dealership
you can order your new truck duel fuel.
The point I was and still attempt to make is that clean burning
abundant fuel is already available. It does not require a massive
federally subsidized program to develop it. We the consumers, the
drivers of America choose not to support it. Then we come along and
complain about high gasoline costs and air pollution that we ourselves
create.
On the other hand until we the consumers choose to convert our cars
and simplify our lives we are going to be subject to our addiction. I
for one would love to see this country energy self sufficient. But to
do it and to get the time to convert we are going to have to do some
environmentally less than ideal things. Like explore for oil in
Alaska.
Reminds me of my response to the guy with the 1660 sq ft all electric
house that was crying about his high electric bill in another NG. Or
the Californian who blamed all their problems on big business
corruption and government. There is no free lunch. If we choose to
live in an energy wasting way, we must pay the price. But if we decide
to change our ways it is going to take some time to convert.
That includes me, you and everybody in America. Government is not the
solution, government is the problem.
David Ladewig
bushc...@aol.com (BushCheater) wrote:
. It is NOT readily available--if so the manufacturers
>would already be installing on cars and shipping them to showrooms. You also
>don't see a lot of propane tanks at the usual refueling (gas) stations.
Heck,
>when I need propane for my grill, I have a hell of a time finding a place
that
>sells it and finding one that is open.
Propane is on every corner here. Try Kmart. They have it right in front. You
just exchange your empty for a full one and be on your way.
David Ladewig
www.cometravelwithme.com
Jim
>house that was crying about his high electric bill in another NG. Or
>the Californian who blamed all their problems on big business
>corruption and government. There is no free lunch. If we choose to
>live in an energy wasting way, we must pay the price. But if we decide
>to change our ways it is going to take some time to convert.
>That includes me, you and everybody in America. Government is not the
>solution, government is the problem.
>
Agreed that lifestyle changes and conservation are in order, as well as both
creating and finding newer and better sources of power.
I'd also agree with your last sentence, though likely in the opposite way from
how you meant it. Here in CA (and perhaps it is my post you are alluding to
here), government is the problem because of its failure to act and to act with
foresight.
I reiterate from the other thread:
the City of Los Angeles is today right now charging its DWP customers the same
ratre that it has for years : about 4 cents per kwh.
SC Edison is currently paying between 34 and 40 cents/kwh - literally across
the street from the City of LA.
LA's DWP is a government agency, not a public utility. It generates a surplus
of power from largely clean sources - LA had no smog alerts in 2000, has the
strictest air quality standards in the country, has been surpassed by Houston
and Denver in the dirty air category, and enjoys air quality comparable to that
of Providence, RI - all while creating and supplying its own electrical needs.
Across the street, Sempra Energy generates kwh's in plants purchased from SC
Edison at the same cost as LA DWP, ships it north to an affiliate in Washington
State, and then re-sells it to SC Edison at up to eight times its initial
cost.
This isn't secret, or illegal, or even shady - it's simply the way a cartel
does business when it can, like OPEC. If you control the supply, you can
squeeze whatever price you want to out of consumers.
Sempra, Reliant and the others do this because they CAN do it. They are not
required to act in the public interest. Their PR campaign about too strict
enviromental controls, etc. is put to the lie by the Los Angeles Department of
Water and Power - an agency of the city government, consitiuted to and required
to act in the public interest - as all energy should and used to be.
I'll also reiterate my final question: can anyone name a single formerly
regulated industry that following deregulation actually developed more
competition and lower prices to consumers? Oil? Natural gas?
Telecommunications? Electricity?
No, no, no, and no.
Cheers,
Jim