[VarianceVQ]

There's no question this has further soured people on our dependence on fossil fuels. I know EVs will still pretty much be a niche for a while yet but I think more people, if for no other reason than to send a message of some kind, will look to distance themselves more from fossil fuels in some way.

Do you think manufacturers step up EV development?

Will this have a positive effect on sales of the upcoming Leaf and Volt?

Do Tesla and Fisker stand a better chance at succeeding/surviving as they expand and go public?

 

[zombie06]

It doesn't really change my opinion of EVs. I'm already sold on EVs for many other reasons. I don't begrudge gasoline-powered cars because their fuel source has been made--in some respects--unnecessarily difficult to attain. I hope that in the short term this at least allows us to more seriously discuss alternatives to deep-sea drilling.

Heck, I'd like to have more nuclear power to sustain my EV. But would a nuclear disaster make me feel less satisfied with my EV? No, not really.

I certainly do hope that EVs continue to receive more respect, but not because of this oil disaster.

 

[hardcore4life]

Eh not me , i couldnt see myself driving a car with no manual, im getting a diesel next

 

[leaftye]

There's no question this has further soured people on our dependence on fossil fuels. I know EVs will still pretty much be a niche for a while yet but I think more people, if for no other reason than to send a message of some kind, will look to distance themselves more from fossil fuels in some way.

The only distance it puts between users and fossil fuels is the length of the transmission line. Most electricity will continue to come from fossil fuels for the foreseeable future of the United States, despite recent events including the famous oil spill in the Gulf, a busted oil pipeline in Alaska, another oil pipeline in Utah and a couple natural gas well blowouts.

I seriously would not expect renewable energy sources to become economically viable on their own for at least a decade, maybe several more. If we really want renewable energy to make big strides, we need to use natural resources to subsidize renewable energy.

 

[98a4]

There's no question this has further soured people on our dependence on fossil fuels.

I stopped reading there because that is completely false. 1 days worth US oil consumption bleeds into the Ocean, doesn't changes ****

Remember global warming false records?
Remember tiger woods whoreism?
Remember Toyota UA?
.
This wont change a DAMN thing.

 

[justanotherusername]

I stopped reading there because that is completely false. 1 days worth US oil consumption bleeds into the Ocean, doesn't changes ****

Remember global warming false records?
Remember tiger woods whoreism?
Remember Toyota UA?
.
This wont change a DAMN thing.

You're out of your complete ****ing mind if you really think people aren't paying attention as some of the most popular vacation spots in the country are being destroyed by offshore drilling....seriously.

This oil spill will ABSOLUTELY have a lasting impact on the public debate on energy. It takes an utter fool to think it won't. The other three things you listed aren't even remotely similar to this incident. :screwy:

If you want to draw a reasonable comparision, lets talk about Three Mile Island, or Chernobyl and how that effected nuclear energy.

 

[VarianceVQ]

I stopped reading there because that is completely false. 1 days worth US oil consumption bleeds into the Ocean, doesn't changes ****

Remember global warming false records?
Remember tiger woods whoreism?
Remember Toyota UA?
.
This wont change a DAMN thing.

Because those things are just as disastrous, important or tangible as what is happening in the Gulf, right?

You're kidding yourself if you think this isn't having an impact on how some people are thinking.

 

[Rob]

We're awash in natural gas. Lets put it to good use.:thumbup:

 

[jettafan[atic]]

I stopped reading there because that is completely false. 1 days worth US oil consumption bleeds into the Ocean, doesn't changes ****

Remember global warming false records?
Remember tiger woods whoreism?
Remember Toyota UA?
.
This wont change a DAMN thing.

I don't think that the spill is going to change much about the oil industry but this is a disaster. I've heard a lot of people talking about fossil fuels and what else we can use that otherwise wouldn't give a damn if the BP spill hadn't happened. How long people decide to care about this remains to be seen though.

 

[leaftye]

You're kidding yourself if you think this isn't having an impact on how some people are thinking.

But will it have any lasting impact on how they act? I doubt it.

They will still vote against subsidizing renewable energy.

They will still vote against setting aside huge swaths of land for wind turbines or solar energy.

They will still vote against taxes that reduce the amount of external costs.

They will still vote against regulations that make fossil fuels more expensive.

They will still vote against public transportation.

They will still vote for wider highways and more of them.

Sure, people will stomp their feet and maybe even picket while the oil is spilling, but don't expect them to make a peep a couple years from now when it comes time to vote for something that will move us away from fossil fuels. And as long as fossil fuels remain inexpensive, don't expect them to vote differently with their pocketbook either until the cost of EV's are within spitting distance of their petro-powered counterparts.

 

[SleeperPrelude]

We're awash in natural gas. Lets put it to good use.:thumbup:

Hell yeah, apparently we can't even drill for oil without having to deal with natural gas (and sometimes explosions)

 

[leaftye]

Hell yeah, apparently we can't even drill for oil without having to deal with natural gas (and sometimes explosions)

Ugh...duh?

 

[justanotherusername]

But will it have any lasting impact on how they act? I doubt it.

They will still vote against subsidizing renewable energy.

They will still vote against setting aside huge swaths of land for wind turbines or solar energy.

They will still vote against taxes that reduce the amount of external costs.

They will still vote against regulations that make fossil fuels more expensive.

They will still vote against public transportation.

They will still vote for wider highways and more of them.

Sure, people will stomp their feet and maybe even picket while the oil is spilling, but don't expect them to make a peep a couple years from now when it comes time to vote for something that will move us away from fossil fuels. And as long as fossil fuels remain inexpensive, don't expect them to vote differently with their pocketbook either until the cost of EV's are within spitting distance of their petro-powered counterparts.

You sure about that? The public DAMN SURE put a damper on nuclear energy.

 

[leaftye]

You sure about that? The public DAMN SURE put a damper on nuclear energy.

Sarcasm?

 

[SleeperPrelude]

Ugh...duh?

Man, it's really hard to relay tone of voice in text.

It was a joke, the point of which being yes, there is a lot of natural gas, and we should use it. And also it combusting caused an accident, which resulted in this thread

 

[leaftye]

It was a joke, the point of which being yes, there is a lot of natural gas, and we should use it. And also it combusting causing an accident recently resulted in this thread

Ah, yes, I do agree. We do use it though. I may be remembering the latest energy report incorrectly, but I believe its use for power generation is growing pretty quick. The explosion in the Gulf isn't the only recent accident, not even the most recent, although I do believe its the most recent accident in the US that's resulted in a loss of human life.

 

[justanotherusername]

Sarcasm?

Not at all. How much public opposition is there anytime there's talk of a nuke plant being constructed?

FL has been against offshore drilling for years, and now they look perfectly justified.

 

[SleeperPrelude]

Ah, yes, I do agree. We do use it though. I may be remembering the latest energy report incorrectly, but I believe its use for power generation is growing pretty quick.

That's where I think it makes the most sense, at least for now. On a large scale using it as the primary source of power supply (and I haven't done a lot of research) seems like a good idea.

As for individual vehicles, we may be a ways off from perfecting the systems for a mass-scale, much less the infrastructure (yes I know we already have CNG/LPG vehicles, and gas is available in many places, but it's not on the scale of gasoline/petrol).

 

[IJM]

IIRC, no new nuclear plants in the US have been licensed since '79.

 

[leaftye]

Not at all. How much public opposition is there anytime there's talk of a nuke plant being constructed?

FL has been against offshore drilling for years, and now they look perfectly justified.

My argument was that people tend to oppose getting off fossil fuels. Why does it seem like you're arguing against me?

That's where I think it makes the most sense, at least for now. On a large scale using it as the primary source of energy supply (and I haven't done a lot of research) seems like a good idea.

As for individual vehicles, we may be a ways off from perfecting the systems for a mass-scale, much less the infrastructure (yes I know we already have CNG/LPG vehicles, and gas is available in many places, but it's not on the scale of gasoline/petrol).

We'll always produce natural gas at some level, but I wouldn't want to become too dependent on it either. I'm okay with using more, but not LOTS more.

We already have lots of infrastructure for natural gas. More than any other country in the world I think. Still, even with the infrastructure, I don't think it's a good idea for automobiles.