Al Gore Wants to Make a Sequel - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-02-2008, 09:31 PM   #31
Refugee
 
europop2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,420
Local Time: 10:25 AM
In all honesty i felt the first film was more Al Gore talking about Al Gore than the enviroment
__________________

__________________
europop2005 is offline  
Old 05-02-2008, 09:35 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 26,959
Local Time: 06:25 AM
I didn't see it, but it probably was.
__________________

__________________
the tourist is offline  
Old 05-03-2008, 04:16 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by the tourist
Anyway, we'll probably solve global warming as soon as we find out, and successfully employ a substitute for oil.
A big If is required there (for a substitute).


Michael Moore had some great points on Larry King:

Quote:
KING: You think gas prices are going to keep going up?

MOORE: I would assume so, because we're already at a peak here, where the actual -- the ability to manufacturer and produce oil -- we're at the limit now. And now we're going to be producing less and less each year for the next 10, 15, 20 years. And if there's only, some say, 40, 60 years of oil left that we can get out of the Earth, there's a calamity waiting to happen somewhere down the road. There's no discussion about it. We just lost eight years to try and do something about it.

KING: You're pessimistic.

MOORE: I am pessimistic about this. I just think because it's not part of the national conversation -- the only thing we seem to talk about is it's costing more to get to work. That's a horrible thing. Look, everybody's getting a check this week from Bush. So, they can give it back to Bush's oil buddies at the gas stations.
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 05-03-2008, 05:45 PM   #34
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:25 AM
We have the answer to the energy & food supply, global terrorism and pollution problems.

Use land for food and the atom for power. Al Gore won't make THAT movie.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 05-03-2008, 06:24 PM   #35
The Fly
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: new zealand
Posts: 173
Local Time: 02:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
We have the answer to the energy & food supply, global terrorism and pollution problems.

Use land for food and the atom for power. Al Gore won't make THAT movie.
That sounds simple enough. But there are debates about whether nuclear power really is "safe". I live in New Zealand, where we won't even touch nuclear power. We rely on hydro-power for most of our electricity.
__________________
mystery girl is offline  
Old 05-04-2008, 12:25 PM   #36
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by mystery girl


That sounds simple enough. But there are debates about whether nuclear power really is "safe". I live in New Zealand, where we won't even touch nuclear power. We rely on hydro-power for most of our electricity.
Hydro is great except we don't have anymore rivers on earth to dam. None have been built in the U.S. since the 60's and the last dam built in the world (in China) displaced more than a million people.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 05-04-2008, 12:35 PM   #37
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:25 AM
You can't implement fission reactors as a long term solution, not only is lead time to slow but the amount of fuel is limited. The safety of nuclear is much better than coal, there is disproportionate criticism and the green movement should be held to account over misrepresentation and fear mongering of the nuclear industry.

Long term solutions demand renewable or sustainable means of energy production. In a magical world a rollout of nuclear fusion reactors by the end of the century would be nice but failing that some sort of carbon capture technology seems the only real way to undo or minimise the damage.

Living standards demand energy and resource use, it is all well and good for us with out laptops, internet, houses/apartments, refrigerators etc. to complain about this but when we take the step of wanting to retard development around the world and deny people things that we already have it becomes a bit unethical.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-04-2008, 03:14 PM   #38
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,460
Local Time: 09:25 AM
excelsior!

wooooooooosh
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline  
Old 05-06-2008, 09:15 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 09:25 AM
More words of wisdom from THE GREAT AL GORE:

http://www.businessandmedia.org/arti...506160205.aspx
__________________
the iron horse is offline  
Old 05-06-2008, 09:32 PM   #40
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
You can't implement fission reactors as a long term solution, not only is lead time to slow but the amount of fuel is limited.
That presumes, of course, that nuclear reactors can only be done using uranium-235, which, indeed, is quite rare. However, that ignores the fact that it is, indeed, quite possible to have uranium-238 reactors, which constitutes the vast majority of natural uranium on the planet (99.2745% versus uranium-235, which constitutes 0.72%). With that, it is estimated that there is anywhere from 10,000 to five billion years worth of uranium-238 for nuclear power use. Russia, currently, has the only online uranium-238 reactor, which has been online since 1980. Japan has one too that has been shut down since 1996, but there has been talk of reviving it.

With that, that also doesn't take into account India's research into thorium-based nuclear reactors (as India has large deposits of this element), which, alone, is more plentiful than all the uranium on Earth. We can add, potentially, another 10,000 to five billion years onto the previous tally.

I think there is more than adequate reason to pursue nuclear power as a long-term power solution.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 02:55 AM   #41
Refugee
 
Moser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: K-Mart Lingerie Section
Posts: 1,794
Local Time: 10:25 AM
Here is a four part lecture about global warming. I've written papers about why anthropogenic global warming is overstated and Professor Bob Carter sums up everything into an enjoyable lecture.




Fact: Al Gore is a hypocrit. You don't need two eyes to see that one.
__________________
Moser is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 11:24 AM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

I think there is more than adequate reason to pursue nuclear power as a long-term power solution.
"Not in my backyard"-syndrome is an obstacle that prevents nuclear power from gaining widespread acceptance, especially for the fast breeder reactors (which are less safe and realiable).
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 12:37 PM   #43
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 12:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by ntalwar


"Not in my backyard"-syndrome is an obstacle that prevents nuclear power from gaining widespread acceptance, especially for the fast breeder reactors (which are less safe and realiable).
Than what, it's a relative statement.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 12:45 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 09:25 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Than what, it's a relative statement.
Compared to u-235 reactors.

Wind farms unfortunately also are considered an eyesore by many.
__________________
ntalwar is offline  
Old 05-07-2008, 11:57 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:25 AM
I've mentioned this before, but there's also a very geopolitical reason to engage this topic, even if one denies global warming:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/07/op...e7a&ei=5087%0A

Quote:
The Democratic Recession
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

There are two important recessions going on in the world today. One has gotten enormous attention. It’s the economic recession in America. But it will eventually pass, and the world will not be much worse for the wear. The other has gotten no attention. It’s called “the democratic recession,” and if it isn’t reversed, it will change the world for a long time.

The term “democratic recession” was coined by Larry Diamond, a Stanford University political scientist, in his new book “The Spirit of Democracy.” And the numbers tell the story. At the end of last year, Freedom House, which tracks democratic trends and elections around the globe, noted that 2007 was by far the worst year for freedom in the world since the end of the cold war. Almost four times as many states — 38 — declined in their freedom scores as improved — 10.

What explains this? A big part of this reversal is being driven by the rise of petro-authoritarianism. I’ve long argued that the price of oil and the pace of freedom operate in an inverse correlation — which I call: “The First Law of Petro-Politics.” As the price of oil goes up, the pace of freedom goes down. As the price of oil goes down, the pace of freedom goes up.

“There are 23 countries in the world that derive at least 60 percent of their exports from oil and gas and not a single one is a real democracy,” explains Diamond. “Russia, Venezuela, Iran and Nigeria are the poster children” for this trend, where leaders grab the oil tap to ensconce themselves in power.

But while oil is critical in blunting the democratic wave, it is not the only factor. The decline of U.S. influence and moral authority has also taken a toll. The Bush democracy-building effort in Iraq has been so botched, both by us and Iraqis, that America’s ability and willingness to promote democracy elsewhere has been damaged. The torture scandals of Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay also have not helped. “There has been an enormous squandering of American soft power, and hard power, in recent years,” said Diamond, who worked in Iraq as a democracy specialist.

The bad guys know it and are taking advantage. And one place you see that most is in Zimbabwe, where President Robert Mugabe has been trying to steal an election, after years of driving his country into a ditch. I would say there is no more disgusting leader in the world today than Mugabe. The only one who rivals him is his neighbor and chief enabler and protector, South Africa’s president, Thabo Mbeki.

Zimbabwe went to the polls on March 29, and the government released the results only last week. Mugabe apparently decided that he couldn’t claim victory, since there was too much evidence to the contrary. So his government said that the opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, had won 47.9 percent of the vote and Mugabe 42.3 percent. But since no one got 50 percent of the vote, under Zimbabwe law, there must now be a runoff.

Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic Change claim to have won 50.3 percent of the vote and have to decide whether or not to take part in the runoff, which will be violent. Opposition figures have already been targeted by a state-led campaign of attacks and intimidation.

If South Africa’s Mbeki had withdrawn his economic and political support for Mugabe’s government, Mugabe would have had to have resigned a long time ago. But Mbeki feels no loyalty to suffering Zimbabweans. His only loyalty is to his fellow anti-colonial crony, Mugabe. What was that anti-colonial movement for? So an African leader could enslave his people instead of a European one?

What Mugabe has done to his country is one of the most grotesque acts of misgovernance ever. Inflation is so rampant that Zimbabweans have to carry their currency — if they have any —around in bags. Store shelves are bare; farming has virtually collapsed; crime by people just starving for food is rampant; and the electric grid can’t keep the lights on.

What can the U.S. do? In Zimbabwe, we need to work with decent African leaders like Zambia’s Levy Mwanawasa to bring pressure for a peaceful transition. And with our Western allies, we should threaten to take Mugabe’s clique to the International Criminal Court in The Hague — just as we did Serbia’s leaders — if they continue to subvert the election.

But we also need to do everything possible to develop alternatives to oil to weaken the petro-dictators. That’s another reason the John McCain-Hillary Clinton proposal to lift the federal gasoline tax for the summer — so Americans can drive more and keep the price of gasoline up — is not a harmless little giveaway. It’s not the end of civilization, either.

It’s just another little nail in the coffin of democracy around the world.
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com