That does clear things up somewhat. I think this is a very important issue for this campaign so I will be doing some additional reading on the subject
vis a vis fusion. Having a good handle on what problems to expect (for example, which nations are in a position to cooperate in this project and what
challenges might such an arrangement face, what is the track record for the companies that would be in a position to accept R and D funding such as
you speak of, etc), and I'll make it a point to share any info I get on that with you for the sake of getting more representation for a sound energy
policy.
One thing you might want to look into along those lines is the quantum nucleonic generator I mentioned. I have heard ample debate on both sides of the
issue and am not ready to say with any certainty whether it sounds viable yet, but it's definately something to examine and determine whether or not
we should fund. Even if it were viable I'd have some reservations about it until certain safety issues were addressed, but I think that such things
do need to at least be probed before being dismissed.
Personally though, I don't believe that a fusion device in every car is the most practical way to go about this. It would probably be more practical
to use fusion as a clean way to generate hydrogen fuel for vehicle use and use advanced engine control systems to get the best possible economy out of
that.
That being the case, I favor the development of alternative fuels in the interim which may serve to advance us in technologies which will be important
to the hydrogen economy and which may also give us cause to start developing the necessary infrastructure for that beforehand (as it may be possible
to convert some alternative fuel infrastructure over to use for hydrogen when fusion is finally viable).
Where do you stand on the development of alternative fuels in the interim? Would it be a waste of money in your opinion, do you feel that all of the
ideas being considered at the moment are boondoggles, or would you favor the development of one or all of the alternative fuels being proposed
presently?
Candidate Declaration: Maverickhunter, Democratic, page 7
privacy
reply posted on 28-4-2007 @ 03:28 PM by The Vagabond
What we need is not unintellgable people ruling the world and the smart people not reproducing
So you'll pass laws to make sure that people who speak clearly are in charge and smart people have lots of sex? I think I just might vote for you.
I haven't heard a promise of sex for the educated since 2004... and that one was too narrowly worded to be any help for me.
Fair warning though: I've already tried the, "would you sleep with me if the fate of the world depended on it" line... and I didn't like the answer, so I think that policy might meet with some opposition. You definately can't count on the vote of the athletic young bartender at a place called the Red Barn, unless she's changed her mind recently. I just thought you should know.
OK, I'm done joking.
I'll talk to the mods from H2H and see if you and I can arrange a debate in the near future.
Just a few tips though... in "hundreds of billions of years" global warming will be ancient history. The sun will not allow humans to live on Earth by 10 billion years from now, in fact probably not 1 billion from now, and we'd actually be lucky to survive long enough for the solar system to kill us. We're planning a future, not a scifi novel and we need to be thinking about making the breakthroughs that will change things in the next 10-30 years, not about how we're going to cryofreeze ourselves and emerge from the ashes 300 years later.
Flying cars may or may not be the most practical answer- my suspicion is that we'll get a lot more success out of innovation in the field of civil engineering designed to reduce the need for and improve access to more efficient mass transit systems.
But given the thrust of your ideas so far, I propose that this debate will work best if we frame it in the following terms:
"describe the workings of our civilization 100 years from now and the merits thereof, and explain how your administration will begin the journey towards bringing that into being." We'll go through it subject by subject- transportation, energy, environment, food and water logistics, sanitation and healthcare, etc each getting two posts per topic to defend our vision and describe how we'll achieve it, and to challenge the other's idea. Maybe 250 words a post to keep it readable since we'll be covering so much?
Sound good?
reply posted on 28-4-2007 @ 07:36 PM by Maverickhunter
Originally posted by The Vagabond
What we need is not unintellgable people ruling the world and the smart people not reproducing
So you'll pass laws to make sure that people who speak clearly are in charge and smart people have lots of sex? I think I just might vote for you.
I haven't heard a promise of sex for the educated since 2004... and that one was too narrowly worded to be any help for me.
Fair warning though: I've already tried the, "would you sleep with me if the fate of the world depended on it" line... and I didn't like the answer, so I think that policy might meet with some opposition. You definately can't count on the vote of the athletic young bartender at a place called the Red Barn, unless she's changed her mind recently. I just thought you should know.
OK, I'm done joking.
I'll talk to the mods from H2H and see if you and I can arrange a debate in the near future.
Just a few tips though... in "hundreds of billions of years" global warming will be ancient history. The sun will not allow humans to live on Earth by 10 billion years from now, in fact probably not 1 billion from now, and we'd actually be lucky to survive long enough for the solar system to kill us. We're planning a future, not a scifi novel and we need to be thinking about making the breakthroughs that will change things in the next 10-30 years, not about how we're going to cryofreeze ourselves and emerge from the ashes 300 years later.
Flying cars may or may not be the most practical answer- my suspicion is that we'll get a lot more success out of innovation in the field of civil engineering designed to reduce the need for and improve access to more efficient mass transit systems.
But given the thrust of your ideas so far, I propose that this debate will work best if we frame it in the following terms:
"describe the workings of our civilization 100 years from now and the merits thereof, and explain how your administration will begin the journey towards bringing that into being." We'll go through it subject by subject- transportation, energy, environment, food and water logistics, sanitation and healthcare, etc each getting two posts per topic to defend our vision and describe how we'll achieve it, and to challenge the other's idea. Maybe 250 words a post to keep it readable since we'll be covering so much?
Sound good?
Right. If you want to know what I am talking about or what I am saying The Vagabound, you should see the film "idiocracy". It's a perfect example of how stupidtiy in the world will end up taking over and eventually the government will be able to circumvent humankind so and inflation will raise to really high amounts, and that people will be stupider and become more fat and the world will become a place where seeing how someone farts will become acceptable. It's a really great film that shows the idiocracy of the world and its inhabitants at the current state of our second-rate education. What we need to do, is that we need to raise our education, so that this doesn't happen, and so that we can prove that we can make all of these fantasies become realities by midway through teenagers in this worlds lifetime.
