The Oil Drum

126 comments on Rhode Island's Smart Choice

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

cynus on June 7, 2006 - 10:11am

I still think we'd be better off saving all that natural gas in order to heat our homes for the decades ahead and find a way to get by without passenger cars.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

ThatsItImout on June 7, 2006 - 2:51pm

cynus,

Yeah, I recently suggested using NG and or Propane in the"off demand" summer monthes and was pretty much kicked around here for saying it.

My argument is still this: If you are going to use nat gas in transportation, (and it it's available, we will) it is better to take out the massively expensive and environmentally damaging middle steps, that is, using nat gas fertilizer to grow corn for ethanol and waste it PLUS waste water and topsoil....or waste nat gas in the tar sand industry, and create a mightmare in carbon release and wasted water and wasted prestine landscape, or, waste nat gas in assisting coal to liquid, AND waste water and create carbon release.....finally, you just have to say, IS IT NOT FAR MORE EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE TO BURN IT DIRECTLY IN TRANSPORTATION AND LEAVE ASIDE THE HUGE DAMAGE. (CAPS for emphesis and not for shout)

Due to the North American problem on nat gas production, i.e. peak nat gas, we would have to be very clever not to just waste it, however, and look for ways to reduce electric demand/heating demand in homes and business to free up enough without sending nat gas prices out of sight and then being in no better shape then before.

I have my doubts on this, being clever has not been a hallmark of American energy use.

Roger Conner known to you as ThatsItImout

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Robert Rapier on June 7, 2006 - 10:38pm

If you are going to use nat gas in transportation, (and it it's available, we will) it is better to take out the massively expensive and environmentally damaging middle steps, that is, using nat gas fertilizer to grow corn for ethanol and waste it PLUS waste water and topsoil....or waste nat gas in the tar sand industry, and create a mightmare in carbon release and wasted water and wasted prestine landscape, or, waste nat gas in assisting coal to liquid, AND waste water and create carbon release.....finally, you just have to say, IS IT NOT FAR MORE EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY RESPONSIBLE TO BURN IT DIRECTLY IN TRANSPORTATION AND LEAVE ASIDE THE HUGE DAMAGE.

That is exactly correct. We are already using natural gas, and will continue to do so, on inefficient schemes like ethanol production. It would be far more efficient to burn it directly.

RR

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

fleam on June 7, 2006 - 6:57pm

Agreed. You're just as dead if you were run down while crossing the street, by a "green" powered SUV as by one that's powered by panda pelts.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

R W Reactionairy on June 7, 2006 - 10:05pm

Actually, wouldn't panda pelts [from a sustainable infestation of the cute little beasties] be considered to be "green" [I admit to being color blind in that part of the spectrum.]

BTW, I picked up your comment on screen names the other day ... and yours is a lot more obscure to me than mine is to you. :-) !!!

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

fleam on June 8, 2006 - 3:55am

Oh, yeah, I was into pocket knives as a kid, what kid wasn't, and I remember looking at one of those knife collector books on them, and seeing this strange blade called a "fleam". It's found on old-old pocket knives, for letting blood. Somehow that gave me an impression that's never left me, that the past, even a mere 100 years ago, compared to our modern, plastic, antiseptic life, was weird.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.