dear has been>>What makes you think the auto companies care what power moves their cars?>>

brother[a bit of histry]when the'auto'was first invented there were MORE electric'auto'sthan petro chemical[petro.-chemical then brought up the auto/industry and made'their'cars run on'their'fuel

in time they needed to'sell'more cars[this was the age of the chemist so they were refining many chemical's that soon would replace'hemp'with'nylon'[see that near_everything[food'we buy is in plastic[the worse'type'of plastic[our plastic has female hormones in things like teats for children]but back to histry you need to sell'auto's'but everyone is using'tram'[cheap'ELECTRIC'trams]that run every 10 minutes or so

so what does the petro/auto/chemical industry do[buy up the tram ways,run them off scedual[not maintsain them,put in uncomfortable seats[then advertise/sell their'gas_powered'cars]

then lobby govt to shut down public/transport[buy up cheap land to suit the new auto freedoms,set up buisness to build moterways[paved with petro chemical tar,in short via petrol engines they reshape the world[they along with the world's/bankers bought up,media,politics,law,industry,medicine[now even child care and water utilities[petro refining uses lots of water,etc

..>>would Grneralmotors..develop better,batteries,>>

yet hp computers is the only one releasing an infinite-recharge one

you see most batteries only accept a few recharges[then we'BUY'a new one[consumerism[ford said let me sell the spare parts to you forever;and i will give you a free car[its about selling us stuff

>>electric cars,a hydrogen fuel cell,?>>

gm built the electic vehicle[but'we'couldnt'buy'it.,thus could only lease it[the plan was to gety a govt subsidy[50.000 on each humbug/hummvee?]just to get a govt_subsidy for a huge gass GUZZLER,then magiclly the few'hundreds'of'elec-tricK.'vehicles were crushed[many brand new

the hydrogen cell?[when the'joe_cell'makes free'hydrogen'gas[from stainless-steel hydrolisis for free[but the'petro'likes its RESALE
selling us daily gas[not a $100 bolt-on and no gas[ever again

they been suppressing teqnoligy bro[auto-INDUSTRY aint your friend
build algie farms[make your own fuel or build a joe cell

<<they wish they had that billion back.<<

wernt THEIR billions bro[govt grants[and our bying THEIR petro engines]reval their research

>>None of the new contenders have been able to compete with it.>>

EGSACTLY[let-em go bust and get'their'research for cents on the dollar]they been hiding it far TOO long]

Arguing against sustainable industry is like arguing against clean air. No-one who values freedom and democracy would tolerate any type of totalitarianism existing within groups from both the extreme right and extreme left. This is why I am so puzzled by people arguing against a shift towards renewable energy, clean industry and sustainable technology. These arguments negate freedom of opinion and stifle initiative.

“My way or the highway. You are either with me or against me.” Is apparently the mantra of such people and groups. It is an attitude which is anthropocentric. Humanity is not alone; we share the planet with other life forms and are the product of the same evolutionary process. For evolution to continue, a large gene pool, healthy ecosystems and a wide range of biodiversity are necessary.

With my background in applied science (specifically Bachelor in Landscape Architecture) I follow both science and environmental publications with innate interest and understanding.

For those who have both the aptitude and interest I recommend the following:

“NewScientist... is now making free all in-depth articles from the past 12 months. In case you missed them, here are the top 10 best features on environmental science."

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn16249-bog-barons-to-trash-mining-top-10-environment-articles.html

And for those whose only raison d'etre for their unmerited appearance on OLO is to launch personal attacks, take to time to realise that people tire easily of such pointless tirades and skip your posts entirely. As I do when even my patience reaches its limits.

I have added that link to my favorites thanks.
I think I am a conservationist I live like one.
But I see no reason to leave honesty behind in talking about the subject.
My view, those who think of me as a right wing sell out should note, is not an inch different than our governments.
We need change that change must be steady and well thought out.
1% of the worlds total that is our share of the problem, we do have a problem.
We will use coal, until we find a replacement.
One poster is unhappy I say we are at the very beginning of searching for new power and fuels yet we are just truly starting our search.
Yes only a fool would not expect big energy owners and even our governments to be other than unhappy with our search.
Finding a new fuel today would see crashes in share markets twice the current crisis, yet we must and will find new power sources.
I proudly stand on the other side of the road to radical environmental extremists, forever

Q&A “Rudd abusing national resources is a joke, right?”

Why would someone who cares “joke” about such a thing?

“I would like to see your comments on this:”

I refer to things I have done when in context to the thread and I refer to myself as who I am

Rather than being (almost) an “emeritus” professor (in other words you are not but would liked to be considered as)…. As I recall from one of your posts

and you talk about “arrogance”

“your comments on this: - As for discussed recently on OLO here:”

someone has since said it

Posted by dovif2, Thursday, 18 December 2008 11:06:46 AM

“They include Japanese scientist Dr Kiminori Itoh, who was an expert reviewer for last year's United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, who declared global warming the "worst scientific scandal in [history]". Former NASA atmospheric scientist Dr Joanne Simpson is quoted: "Since I am no longer affiliated with any organisation nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly … As a scientist I remain sceptical."”

Pelican “You sometimes have to ask yourself why some of these decisions are made - is it just ignorance, bad planning and forethought or something else. Us humble folk will probably never know.”

Absolutely.

Personally I believe us humble folk do know best (although ‘water’ remains a conundrum) .

A recurring theme of my posts is that individuals do know best and we are best served when left to decide for ourselves, rather than be hamstrung and herded by a pig ignorant bureaucrat employed by government who has been got at by “lobbyists” from any and every special interest and either do-gooder or commercially motivated group.

Hence small government, with decentralized and limited authority will produce better outcomes than any attempt at centralized authority and “planning”.

Of course, some folk around here think that such a view is “extremist”.

The important thing is the values I support allow those who disagree to hold their view, the central-authoritarians have been seen in the past to be far less tolerant.

did anyone catch the environmenmtal report writer[garnot] on 7.30 report last night

so much for this dark night of environmental carbon tax[sic]

how important is the environment when he mindlessly excuses murder of a river in new guinie?

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2451559.htm

by their deeds will we know them?
by what they do [not what they say]

from
http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2451559.htm

quote>>ALAN BREEN: I haven't received any reports of that sort of damage as a result of anything that we're doing. So, you know, more than happy to talk to Mr Nuri about that, but he hasn't come to us to complain.

STEVE MARSHALL: But Ketu Nuri says he did complain.

KETU NURI: I raised it several time at the CMC review meetings last year. (Inaudible). But the concern was not addressed.

STEVE MARSHALL: Mr Nuri even wrote to Dr Ross Garnaut,

the Australian Government's chief adviser on climate change and carbon emissions. Dr Garnaut has a long history in PNG, having helped establish the country's post-independence monetary and mining policies.

He now sits on the Ok Tedi board and is chairman of PNG Sustainable, the mine's majority owner.

Dr Garnaut, who recently visited Port Moresby for climate change talks, reluctantly spoke to the ABC about the issue.

But as the chairman of PNG Sustainable and a board member of Ok Tedi, is it OK to let that amount of waste to go down the river?

ROSS GARNAUT, CHAIRMAN, PNG SUSTAINABLE: You would not believe the amount of effort that's gone into carefully managing that including the investment of $400 million in a project to remove the toxic sulphur from the project, including the commissioning of first one dredge, then a second dredge to remove material from the river.

It's the most thorough and careful management of the environment that's ever been undertaken by a mining company. Thanks very much>>

'thanks'for the belief in his theory?[fish]?