PDA

View Full Version : Environmental ' Radicals ' Trying To Derail Canadian Economy - Gov't



OZZ
9th January 12, 09:34 PM
This :

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/01/09/pol-joe-oliver-radical-groups.html

There has been some pretty fierce opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline on both sides of the border. The Alberta Oilsands project has been controversial from the get-go and is a certifiable environmental disaster in my opinion, and , yes, I am informed on the subject. I'm not some pot-smoking tree hugger who doesn't know the facts...the oilsands is a filthy mess and an incredible drain on our freshwater resources, among other things.
Why waste so much time and energy on extracting a resource that has basically outlived its usefulness ? At least in developed nations..yeah, yeah, the Chinese will still be using oil 40 fucking years from now..let them get it from the Russians.
I say invest in new technology and the development of cleaner energy sources instead of sucking every last oz. of oil out of the goddamn ground.
Am I being realistic ?

Robot Jesus
9th January 12, 10:23 PM
the oil sands are the second largest deposit of oil in the world, we better dig that shit up before cold fusion becomes a thing. also resources and environment are provincial powers, and this is Alberta.

if the pipeline falls though there will just be another one going to the coast and then china, this oil is getting to market one way or another.

Cullion
10th January 12, 02:59 AM
Why waste so much time and energy on extracting a resource that has basically outlived its usefulness ? At least in developed nations..

What the fuck are you talking about?

OZZ
10th January 12, 05:18 AM
Yes, I know fossil fuels are still the big show ..but oil is on its way out.
I'm talking about being forward-thinking...thinking like this guy :
http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=342
Ovshinsky is a brilliant man.
Let the third-world countries rely on oil..
Oil sucks.
Tell me something I don't know , Cullion.

OZZ
10th January 12, 05:23 AM
the oil sands are the second largest deposit of oil in the world, we better dig that shit up before cold fusion becomes a thing. also resources and environment are provincial powers, and this is Alberta.

if the pipeline falls though there will just be another one going to the coast and then china, this oil is getting to market one way or another.

Cold fusion is still pretty controversial, isn't it ?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
10th January 12, 05:23 AM
The only realistic way that humanity is going to continue using energy at this ever increasing rate is to embrace the energy rich solar system that surrounds us.

OZZ
10th January 12, 05:33 AM
The only realistic way that humanity is going to continue using energy at this ever increasing rate is to embrace the energy rich solar system that surrounds us.

Explain.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
10th January 12, 05:46 AM
60-70% of all the worlds energy is used to drive inductance machines of some sort or other, things llike steel rolling mills, ore crushing machines, smelting etc.. Most of these high energy processes would be more efficienet in low gravity and in a place were there is a continual supply of free energy.

Space is that place!

OZZ
10th January 12, 05:49 AM
So we need to move our factories and mills into outer space ?

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
10th January 12, 05:55 AM
Yes

OZZ
10th January 12, 06:05 AM
You're talking waaay down the road, man.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
10th January 12, 06:10 AM
Not if we start NOW!

The technology to realise this is already available. It just there is no pollitical and hence no commercial will to follow this through.

Ultimatly it is humanity's only chance of long term survival and prosperity. We should just bite the bullet and get on with it!

Robot Jesus
10th January 12, 08:10 AM
Oil is going to be the big show for the foreseeable future, alternative energies are only going to look interesting once oil becomes really painful. as for space biased production; we need people to stop laughing about the space elevator and then, 50 years later, we can build it.

Pie of Hate
10th January 12, 08:23 AM
Are plastics still dependent on oil? We use an awful lot of that too.

AAAAAA
10th January 12, 08:31 AM
Fertilizers, medical drugs...

Robot Jesus
10th January 12, 08:46 AM
...certain cheese like condiments...

Ajamil
10th January 12, 09:03 AM
Until something can replace plastic, there is no forseeable end to oil necessity. Still, we can lower how much is used in fuel.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
10th January 12, 10:45 AM
Its possible to make plastics from other sources it just that its cheaper at the moment not to.

KO'd N DOA
10th January 12, 11:48 AM
Enbridge will go ahead. Don't blame the environmentalist.
I blame their competators, who just are doing business by playing muck i muck with them. Northgate or Keystone, or whatever enbridge wants will be interferred with by the pawns manipulated or funded by competition.
Huge money and political ambitions are at stake.

This is not an Alberta issue as this is transboundary, subject to a whole host of review and other processes.

Robot Jesus
10th January 12, 02:07 PM
yes, but it's a conservative government on all levels; nothing will stop this.

lant3rn
10th January 12, 02:10 PM
/\ forgets about the natives

KO'd N DOA
10th January 12, 02:19 PM
The tactic is to jam the consultations to delay the project. I have been to a few of these Fenderal Impact Assessment Panals and with 30 participents it could take a few days. How are they going to cope with the 4000 plus people who have signed up to give their opinion?

The outcome expected is to force the government to tye in a trillion dollars of unresolved native land claims with this file. See the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline for example. That has been delayed decades due to Native environmental/social concerns.

Vieux Normand
10th January 12, 03:03 PM
The only realistic way that humanity is going to continue using energy at this ever increasing rate is to embrace the energy rich solar system that surrounds us.

Go ahead, Max.

Well...what's keeping you?

Oh, you want someone else to do this.

Meanwhile, aren't the pro-Gateway-Pipeline types also funded in part by "foreign interests"?

Harper's government may want to watch their usage: it's often been dictators on the way out (such as those deposed in the Arab Spring) who play the "it's-the-foreigners'-fault" card.

OZZ
10th January 12, 03:54 PM
I understand the sense of urgency to minimize North America's reliance on foreign oil supplies, with the Middle East being volatile and all that shit..and this pipeline IS going to happen, no matter how many roadblocks are put up.
The thing that I really hate about the oil sands is the incredible amount of water it takes to keep the process going.
There's no going back I guess..its not like the government and the oil companies are going to just say - 'OK, well fuck the oil sands..let's stop digging. ' Its done now and it won't stop until its finished, I guess there's not much sense bitching about it.

As far as the Native Americans are concerned..the opposition shown by them is largely posturing to get a bigger slice of the pie. Most of them don't give a shit about the environment and just want money.
However, there are always exceptions..and I'm willing to bet that there will be not just protests, but acts of sabotage as this pipeline project moves forward.
Things could get very messy, on both sides of the border.
Barrack Obama is going to bend over and do what ever he can to try and get himself re elected..the Harper government is pro- Albertan, and will do whatever they can to further big business interests so the tax dollars flow into their coffers in any event.
What's worse, I wonder ? Proceeding headlong with the oil sands or starting to drill new wells up in the Arctic as the ocean starts to thaw and risking another environmental disaster up there ?
I'm just so fed up with the oil industry. Christ, we've got the technology to phase it out, let's just push harder. If there was a real willingness to do so, it would happen. But Nooooo, Shell and BP and all these fucking Arabs want to bleed everyone and make as much money as possible. I'm sick of getting exploited at the gas pump..

lant3rn
10th January 12, 04:36 PM
I think if you lived in Alberta you'd sing a different tune

Feryk
10th January 12, 04:54 PM
He would. Albertans by and large feel that the pipelines are necessary, and while we believe that we should minimize the environmental impact, it shouldn't stop us. And, btw, the technology has advanced a lot and 85% of the water is recycled now, OZZ. At least, that's what their propaganda says.

The government gave us a major signal yesterday. By calling out the environmentalists early, the Feds have taken the position of 'This is gonna happen fast'.

They will fast track the regulation, and get shovels in the ground ASAP.

Part of this is to pressure the Obama Administration into greenlighting the Keystone pipeline. Essentially, this is 'the US needs our oil, but we have other customers, like China'. And we aren't gonna wait for you.

IF Keystone is greenlighted, you will see the pressure for this pipeline die down, IMO.

elipson
10th January 12, 06:02 PM
Exploited at the gas pump???

WTF are you talking about??? Do you have even the most BASIC understanding of economics??

You know how you get exploited at the gas pumps? You allow oil to enter the market through only a few sources, forcing the prices up. You know what this pipeline does? It creates MORE sources of oil to enter the market, increasing competition, oil supply, and therefore taking pressure OFF prices.

The only way to make alternative power sources competitive right now it to "exploit" you at the pumps so much so that alternatives become cost effective.

So what the fuck are you even arguing about? You are bitching about oil companies charging you so much, and yet your prefered solution would require charging MUCH HIGHER amounts to make alternatives feasible.

Oil is going to be king-shit of energy for the next 50 years at least. Alternatives sources are still in the nascent phase are relatively much more expensive than oil. Canada on a whole should cash in on this resource before alternatives DO become competitive, and therefore make the second largest oil source in the world worthless.


I FUCKING HATE when people bitch about oil companies charging too much, and then bitch when they do ANYTHING to increase the oil supply on the market. You know why one reason why oil is so expensive? Because certain people do everything in their power to stop oil companies from increasing the supply of oil!

elipson
10th January 12, 06:04 PM
He would. Albertans by and large feel that the pipelines are necessary, and while we believe that we should minimize the environmental impact, it shouldn't stop us. And, btw, the technology has advanced a lot and 85% of the water is recycled now, OZZ. At least, that's what their propaganda says.

The government gave us a major signal yesterday. By calling out the environmentalists early, the Feds have taken the position of 'This is gonna happen fast'.

They will fast track the regulation, and get shovels in the ground ASAP.

Part of this is to pressure the Obama Administration into greenlighting the Keystone pipeline. Essentially, this is 'the US needs our oil, but we have other customers, like China'. And we aren't gonna wait for you.

IF Keystone is greenlighted, you will see the pressure for this pipeline die down, IMO.

There is enough oil in the oil sands to supply both pipelines without a problem. This is about selling as much as you can, as fast as you can.

Feryk
10th January 12, 06:08 PM
^ Hit a nerve. Your point about supply and demand is true in the macro sense.

One of the arguements you are about to hear is that the government will be subsidizing the pipeline by giving the oil companies huge tax breaks to build it.

On the surface, this is true. However, it is more than compensated by the extra revenue that will be generated by the income tax paid by the workers, and more importantly, the royalties associated with the pipeline.

The oil companies want to get this done now, partly because interest rates are so low. They are going to finance most of this build with long term bond issues at fixed rates. The market is so worried about security, they can float a relatively low yielding bond and get lots of demand for it. They know this will not last forever.

lant3rn
10th January 12, 06:31 PM
I haven't made my mind up on the issue yet. I gernerally agree with ferick on this but there are oppossing concerns i have as well.


like..

If the pipeline is feasable. ie. will provide a good return on the capital invested. Why does it need to be subsidized?

If this thing is put through to quickly, I see risk of natural disaster raising above a lvl i feel comfortable with. Looking through the safety records of large oil projects doesn't provide much comfort when you examine the potential negative ecological, local, and long term consequences that could come from an ill conceived infrastrure designed to move massive amounts of toxic chemicals.


If/When this goes through, it i think it really needs to be babysat closely. If not then i can guess a few years down the road murphy's law will strike again. Most likely due to incompetence and stupidity, due to lack of oversight.

elipson
10th January 12, 07:12 PM
I don't see any reason for this to be subsidized, even if it will provide a long term gain for the government.

I don't see any reason for ANY oil company to be subsidized. Oil is so valuable that companies should have no trouble getting private investors to pony up the cash. And its value is only going to increase in the coming decades.

There are very legitimate environmental concerns for a project like this, which must be handled in a mature and transparent way. We should not, however, cancel all oil developments based simply on fear mongering and exageration. We must find the balance.

Robot Jesus
10th January 12, 09:56 PM
it's almost impossible to "cash in " on oil companies wealth without some well becoming unprofitable and dropping production reducing the tax funds you raised taxes to get in the first place. Oil is a very risky game, the companies in question manage risk very well, but losses are a real possibility that hit in a second. On advantage that Canada has is that we control almost all mineral rights so we can have a nuanced royalty system that cuts the fat without hitting muscle, but the margins are surprisingly thin so it doesn't take much for it to be economical to cut production.

elipson
10th January 12, 11:08 PM
Considering the record profits that oil companies have been enjoying of late, they seem to be doing an excellent job of managing risk.

And by "cashing in" I also include adding thousands of jobs to the regional and national economy.

OZZ
10th January 12, 11:11 PM
Exploited at the gas pump???

WTF are you talking about??? Do you have even the most BASIC understanding of economics??

You know how you get exploited at the gas pumps? You allow oil to enter the market through only a few sources, forcing the prices up. You know what this pipeline does? It creates MORE sources of oil to enter the market, increasing competition, oil supply, and therefore taking pressure OFF prices.

The only way to make alternative power sources competitive right now it to "exploit" you at the pumps so much so that alternatives become cost effective.

So what the fuck are you even arguing about? You are bitching about oil companies charging you so much, and yet your prefered solution would require charging MUCH HIGHER amounts to make alternatives feasible.

Oil is going to be king-shit of energy for the next 50 years at least. Alternatives sources are still in the nascent phase are relatively much more expensive than oil. Canada on a whole should cash in on this resource before alternatives DO become competitive, and therefore make the second largest oil source in the world worthless.


I FUCKING HATE when people bitch about oil companies charging too much, and then bitch when they do ANYTHING to increase the oil supply on the market. You know why one reason why oil is so expensive? Because certain people do everything in their power to stop oil companies from increasing the supply of oil!

Take the fucking soother out of your mouth, Elipson.
I'm just bitching , that's what I do..everyone else humors me, so if you don't want to - fuck off. I don't care what you have to say anyways because you're a giant man-child most of the time.
I just like to get discussions going on things like this..so stfu.

OZZ
10th January 12, 11:21 PM
You know how you get exploited at the gas pumps? You allow oil to enter the market through only a few sources, forcing the prices up. You know what this pipeline does? It creates MORE sources of oil to enter the market, increasing competition, oil supply, and therefore taking pressure OFF prices

You don't say ???

My concern isn't the pipeline..its happening no matter what. My concern is minimizing the environmental damage that the oil sands is causing.

elipson
11th January 12, 03:42 AM
Get discussions going with good fucking arguments!!!!

Is that too much to fucking ask?

There is nothing I hate more than fairly intelligent people posting absolute crap. You can't have a good discussion when the opening post is total dog shit.


Why waste so much time and energy on extracting a resource that has basically outlived its usefulness ? You seriously thought you could post that kind of blatantly ignorant opinion and not get ridiculed for it? What the fuck were you thinking.

If you want to post shitty arguments, go do it in CTC.

Cullion
11th January 12, 03:51 AM
Yes, I know fossil fuels are still the big show ..but oil is on its way out.
I'm talking about being forward-thinking...thinking like this guy :
http://www.greenenergyohio.org/page.cfm?pageID=342
Ovshinsky is a brilliant man.
Let the third-world countries rely on oil..
Oil sucks.
Tell me something I don't know , Cullion.

You spend too much time reading 'alternative science' sites and not enough time thinking through the numbers. Oil is going nowhere for decades.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
11th January 12, 05:58 AM
Go ahead, Max.

Well...what's keeping you?

Oh, you want someone else to do this.



Its the reason I became an engineer. My current work in bone remodelling and fracture prediction has direct translation to the space industry.

So, if the aim of your misguided snipe was to highlight some hypocritical behaviour on my behalf then sorry Vieux you are much mistaken.

And yes it's in my best interest to get as many people as possible to devote their meaningless lives to something worth while and of great benefit to humanity.

ef3rh2qRJvo

AAAAAA
11th January 12, 08:22 AM
I'd like to add meaning to my life, and I like snowboarding. What kind of fractures are you looking for?

Ajamil
11th January 12, 08:30 AM
I'm with ya, Max. If the opportunity is in my lifetime I would line up for mineral extraction of the asteroids.

As for the pipeline, how does this create more sources of oil? Canada already supplies most of its oil to the US and we get most of our oil from Canada. If we wanted sources to increase, shouldn't our nations be looking elsewhere for buyers/sellers?

OZZ
11th January 12, 11:21 AM
Get discussions going with good fucking arguments!!!!

Is that too much to fucking ask?

Actually, just bitching sometimes draws out more people who would normally just ignore the thread.
I rarely make bad arguments..poor statements, yes, but my arguments are usually pretty sound.

As for your argument..fine.
From WIKI:

OPEC's ability to control the price of oil has diminished somewhat since then, due to the subsequent discovery and development of large oil reserves in Alaska, the North Sea, Canada, the Gulf of Mexico, the opening up of Russia, and market modernization. As of November 2010, OPEC members collectively hold 79% of world crude oil reserves and 44% of the world’s crude oil production, affording them considerable control over the global market.[6] The next largest group of producers, members of the OECD and the Post-Soviet states produced only 23.8% and 14.8%, respectively, of the world's total oil production.[7] As early as 2003, concerns that OPEC members had little excess pumping capacity sparked speculation that their influence on crude oil prices would begin to slip.
^
I'm not blind to this.
Yes, I am sick of being screwed at the pumps - the source of the oil is neither here nor there as far as that complaint goes. OPEC uses every stupid little excuse under the sun to increase prices on a daily basis - they always raise the prices during heavy travel seasons, holidays and long weekends - and it pisses me off. That's not an argument, that's a statement of fact.
Even when this pipeline is built,I don't expect the price of crude to just drop off and all of a sudden gas will be cheaper than its been in a decade.
Big corporations' greed knows no bounds..when you have executives writing themselves multi-million dollar bonuses while at the same time laying off the poor shmucks who make $13 an hour - don't expect any generosity on their part - no matter how plentiful the flow of oil becomes.


You spend too much time reading 'alternative science' sites and not enough time thinking through the numbers. Oil is going nowhere for decades
I'm well aware of this, Cullion. Its 50 years at the minimum..but in the big picture, which is what I'm trying to get you guys to consider here, that's not that far off.
I just want people to throw ideas around. For fuck's sake..

OZZ
11th January 12, 11:25 AM
If the opportunity is in my lifetime I would line up for mineral extraction of the asteroids.

This idea is fraught with peril..

Robot Jesus
11th January 12, 11:35 AM
a pipeline is cheaper and more efficient then a pipeline, it allows for faster rate of delivery and frees up funds that then can be spent on faster extraction. So while it doesn't mean more oil in total it does mean more oil per second.

OZZ
11th January 12, 11:45 AM
a pipeline is cheaper and more efficient then a pipeline

???

Feryk
11th January 12, 01:20 PM
OZZ in big oil, there is NO ONE making $13/hour.

Hell, my kid works at a Montana's for $15/hour.

In truth, even the lowest guy on the totem pole working on the rigs is pulling in $80-90K/year. Guys with experience make $140-$200K/year. These guys are uneducated for the most part. No trade tickets, either. I have a number of them as clients.

Shitty lifestyle, but lucrative.

Feryk
11th January 12, 01:23 PM
Oh, and as for your future energy technology issue - Oil is it for the near future. 50 years from now, we'll still be burning the stuff. We MAY make a move to more electricity, which in North America will mean more usage of Natural Gas, but that's mainly due to price differential per GJ of energy produced.

Fossil Fuels aren't going anywhere for the next century or so. Maybe longer - unless there is a serious breakthrough (like Cold Fusion actually working).

Robot Jesus
11th January 12, 01:45 PM
???

more efficient then trucking, which is what we do with oil when there is no pipeline. my proofreading bad, I haz the dumb.

Vieux Normand
11th January 12, 02:49 PM
And yes it's in my best interest to get as many people as possible to devote their meaningless lives to something worth while and of great benefit to humanity.

No better way to do this than by example.

Bought your ticket yet?

elipson
11th January 12, 03:02 PM
Oil companies aren't laying off ANYONE right now. They can't get enough workers in Fort Mac right now.

The price of oil is not going to drop off significantly anytime in the future. But the more sources that come onto the market, the less impact OPEC or other disruptions will have on the price of oil.

OZZ
11th January 12, 03:16 PM
I don't think it will take a century to get most of the gasoline powered engines off the roads. Not if people embrace the new technology and they make the damn cars so they can drive a good distance without having to recharge.
But cars aren't the only thing that have to change...

Well, if this latest teaching contract doesn't get me back in the door, maybe Ft. McMurray will be my next temporary home then.
I've done some reading on the non-professional jobs (ie. roughneck) that are available in the oil industry. They don't sound like fun..but I'll do it for a couple of years to bank some cash if I have to.


Hell, my kid works at a Montana's for $15/hour.

That's because you are in the land of plenty.
Ontario is hurting..jobs that used to pay $16-$18 an hour are out there for $12 an hour now.The unemployment rate is 10% in my city right now. The highest in the country.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
11th January 12, 03:26 PM
Bought your ticket yet?

Was given a complimenary one.

AAAAAA
11th January 12, 05:45 PM
The unemployment rate is 10% in my city right now. The highest in the country.

That's a very very very low unemployment rate for European standards, especially for young people.

OZZ
12th January 12, 09:09 AM
That's a very very very low unemployment rate for European standards, especially for young people.

Well, I don't live in Europe.
I live in North America and I paid through the ass for my education ..I'm fed up with the only people getting ahead being all the rich fucks who pull each other's knobs all day.
The thing that bothers me the most is the lack of opportunity there is for people without connections.
I'm not starving or anything..I know I live better than most people do. But for the amount I shelled out for school - I should be making a lot more money and have better job opportunities than what's available here right now.
I should be the editor of a big magazine or publishing company or something.
This city sucks..
Thread derail complete.
Have a nice day.

Ajamil
12th January 12, 09:35 AM
That a lot of should. Don't you have your own antique company? I'm presuming you've already looked into your own publishing.

OZZ
12th January 12, 09:39 AM
Well,yeah..we are small business owners.
I haven't applied at any of the big publishing houses..I hear the pay isn't all that good.
I want to be the one in charge.

lant3rn
12th January 12, 09:40 AM
you have to start somewhere ozz

Ajamil
12th January 12, 09:44 AM
Can't be a vaisha by applying for sudra positions. There's no shortage of authors wanting to be published. It's a matter of printing capital, yes?

Vieux Normand
12th January 12, 03:32 PM
Was given a complimenary one.

What excellent news.

You can do your bone-adaptation research experientially. Beats a boring ol' lab.

Just stay in a microgravity environment for--say--a year or so. No exercise machines, no resistance training of any kind. Just...float.

Then come back to Earth and immediately engage in some jogging on pavement, high-weight reps and maybe some MMA bouts.

Have someone record the effect of all this on your skeleton.

Best of all, this simple methodology is as repeatable as it is rigourous. If nobody else is intrepid enough to do the confirm-or-deny on your valuable research...you can do it again--and again!

Well...what are you waiting for? Humanity--and space--need you!

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
12th January 12, 04:16 PM
I think you might be onto something!

Feryk
12th January 12, 04:41 PM
PLEEEASE put the MMA bouts on YouTube!

Feryk
12th January 12, 04:43 PM
Oh, and if you think Ozz was being reactionary:

www.ethicaloil.org

Ezra Levant's baby. At least he can't be accused of being unclear on his position. Even if that position is with his head up his ass.

Dr. Socially Liberal Fiscally Conservative Vermin
12th January 12, 05:07 PM
PLEEEASE put the MMA bouts on YouTube!

Pay per view only sorry.

Cullion
13th January 12, 02:54 PM
That's a very very very low unemployment rate for European standards, especially for young people.

It's not as bad in the countries with freer labour markets like the UK. Many continental countries' employee protections make it such a high risk to hire people (because they're so hard to fire again if they aren't doing a good job, or sometimes simply even if the company is having financial hard times) that it acts as a big incentive against hiring young people.

Robot Jesus
13th January 12, 03:48 PM
I remember talking about it with someone when I was in France, it seemed like he refused to understand how a "tissue" law would help young workers.

Hedley LaMarr
14th January 12, 03:50 PM
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politics/os-newt-gingrich-campaign-office-20120113,0,17269.story



Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/arts-culture/newt-gingrich-PEHST000779.topic)
said Friday he wants a "bold" space program, and he called for NASA (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/science-technology/space-programs/nasa-ORGOV000098.topic)
to accept more risk and offer tax-free cash prizes for private space enterprise.

The former U.S. House speaker told the Orlando Sentinel editorial board he wants America to "reclaim [the] vision" expressed in President John F. Kennedy's 1961 call for the United States to lead exploration of space,

"I love the romance of space," Gingrich said. "I love the idea of going out there. I love the idea of [following] John F. Kennedy's speech on why we should go to the moon.

Given the retirement of the space shuttle and a delay in the next U.S. rocket capable of taking humans into space until at least 2018, the space issue could have significant resonance on Florida's Space Coast, as the Republican presidential field approaches the Jan. 31 primary.


Check out these unusual destinations around the world. (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/travel/vacation-starter/la-tr-oddspots-pg,0,7406096.photogallery?track=orl-mark-promo-news-embed-vs-bizzare-destinations)


Gingrich, who finished fourth in both the Iowa caucus and the New Hampshire primary, stopped short of saying he must win Florida, but did say it could be a "make-or-break state." In Orlando to open an office and raise money, he clearly hopes his views on space will distinguish him from his five GOP (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/politics/parties-movements/republican-party-ORGOV0000004.topic)
rivals and especially front-runner Mitt Romney (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/politics/government/mitt-romney-PEPLT007376.topic)
, who recently mocked him for wanting to colonize the moon.

NASA's long-term deep-space plans – and its encouragement of commercial alternatives -- face daunting federal budget battles. Gingrich did not specifically address money, except to complain about NASA's bureaucracy.

Gingrich said NASA must be "more realistic about risk taking," both for itself and in encouraging the private space industry, including offering large cash prizes to entrepreneurs willing to invest in new space technology, including a private space station, moon colonization and a trip to Mars.

"People take risks to climb Mt. Everest. People take risks to hang-glide. People take risks to do lots of things," Gingrich said. "If you offer a more open-ended system, you say, 'Here's the prize to get there but we understand it's risky,' I think you'll see a lot more people investing and taking risks."

Currently, companies such as Boeing (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/economy-business-finance/manufacturing-engineering/aerospace-manufacturing/boeing-co.-ORCRP017215.topic)
, Sierra Nevada Corp., SpaceX and Orbital Sciences (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/topic/economy-business-finance/orbital-sciences-corporation-ORCRP011512.topic)
are competing for grants to develop space launch vehicles and capsules that can put astronauts into lower Earth orbit. Others, such as Bigelow Aerospace and Excalibur Almaz, are developing private space stations

OZZ
16th January 12, 11:08 AM
I'm not against continuing the space program and pushing ahead with things like shuttles to the moon. But the money should come from the private sector..there's plenty of rich assholes out there with money to burn.
U.S.taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for it.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 11:34 AM
Why choose?

Make Welfare recipients become NASA test subjects.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 12:04 PM
I can't run against MJS.
We'll split the ghey vote.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 12:23 PM
how about a TopNob and MJSVP ticket.

Spade: The Real Snake
16th January 12, 12:49 PM
With that VP, yes.

KO'd N DOA
16th January 12, 03:03 PM
Top Nob is an image makeover. The electorate is fickel and want a powerful name. Top Gun, ZZ Top. Also this will help motivate you to lose that paunch.

Ajamil
5th February 12, 11:46 AM
TopNob is your alter ego - an aggressive ghey that only gives, never takes.

Feryk
9th February 12, 10:14 AM
Someone needs to change NoB's name to 'TopNoB'. Let the campaigns begin!

OZZ
9th February 12, 10:10 PM
Stop shitting in this thread.
I want to be able to use it when the war starts.

OZZ
3rd March 12, 11:14 AM
I was reading an article the other day..well, a couple of articles on the same subject published within the same week...
Anyways, some big scientific data was revealed in regard to the actual environmental damage the oil sands is projected to cause and its looking like things were quite overblown. In fact, the amount that the oil sands dig/extraction is supposed to contribute to the heating of the atmosphere is negligible 0.5% or something like that.
I'm still not happy about the amount of fresh water being wasted on it though..
Nonetheless..I'll see if I can find one of the articles and link it up. The real culprit as far as global warming goes is coal - no surprise there. But what did surprise me is the extent to which it is still being used. It seems so 19th century..but coal is still fucking huge even in the most developed nations.
Terrible..that's what needs to be eradicated.

Feryk
5th March 12, 03:25 PM
88% of the water is now recycled, Ozz. New tech in the last five or so years.

And it was .005 of a degree of global warming if we burned ALL of the reserves in one year. Don't trust that study too much. Pretty sure it was funded by Big Oil. The Rutherford show was talking about it, and even he (a noted booster of Big Oil in Alberta) was a little skeptical.

FTR, that's 170 BILLION barrels of oil.

KO'd N DOA
6th March 12, 09:34 AM
Oh nooos...trump card played...hockey, and by proxi the canadian way of life is threatend by global warming. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/climate-change-threatens-outdoor-hockey-in-canada/article2358320/

Feryk
6th March 12, 03:56 PM
Well, this year, outdoor skating has been shite around here....we've had a very warm winter.

OZZ
25th April 12, 08:33 AM
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/canada-politics/canadian-scientists-continue-muzzled-harper-government-234902614.html

Not the first time..

Feryk
25th April 12, 12:41 PM
That article is bullshit.

First of all, the person talking about the muzzling is an ARTIST and ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST. NOT a scientist at all.

Second, she's pissed off because the federal government cancelled the funding she was getting for an art show that was critical of them. I wouldn't pay someone to badmouth me, either. She has every right to say what she wants, but she's gonna have to find someone who actually will pay her to express it.

Third, any large organization (government, corporate, religious) tries to make sure that the only message coming from their people is the one that they control. It's called Media Relations. We can argue about whether it's right or not, but it IS common practice.

Spade: The Real Snake
25th April 12, 12:50 PM
http://www.postcity.com/images/cache/cf75e21c04e179b8e807aacb5fc456ff.jpeg

http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lozjqj3Edh1qzsjkco1_500.jpg
a couple of Five Molson Canucklestanian "10"s

Feryk
25th April 12, 12:57 PM
Who are those people? 10s? Not even 5s.

OZZ
25th April 12, 03:58 PM
That article is bullshit.

First of all, the person talking about the muzzling is an ARTIST and ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIVIST. NOT a scientist at all.

Second, she's pissed off because the federal government cancelled the funding she was getting for an art show that was critical of them. I wouldn't pay someone to badmouth me, either. She has every right to say what she wants, but she's gonna have to find someone who actually will pay her to express it.

Third, any large organization (government, corporate, religious) tries to make sure that the only message coming from their people is the one that they control. It's called Media Relations. We can argue about whether it's right or not, but it IS common practice.

It sounds like the article is referring to more than one person, Feryk. Not just a lone individual with an axe to grind.

Feryk
25th April 12, 04:57 PM
If that's the case, why do they quote the individual with an axe to grind who has nothing to do with the discussion?

OZZ
25th April 12, 08:46 PM
No, I mean more than one environmental scientist has been told to zip it.