General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events Topic
Topic: An answer to Alan
Page: 1 of 1
mail
OhioCatFan
2/23/2012 2:45 PM
Just one more thought here, Alan, since the original thread was locked.  By conservative estimates we have at least 100 years of natural gas in shale reserves in the USA.  If we unlock these and use nat gas for vehicles and for power generation, we can buy ourselves the time needed to really develop new technologies for energy -- fuel cells, nuclear fusion reactors, much more efficient solar cells, etc.  These technologies are not quite ready for prime time yet, but I have no doubt they will be in the future.  Nat gas is best thought of as a "transition fuel."  It is much cleaner than diesel for powering trucks and it's even cleaner burning than gasoline.  And, of course, in power plants it's much cleaner than coal, though clean coal technologies are helping reduce pollution from coal-fired plants.
Last Edited: 2/23/2012 2:46:49 PM by OhioCatFan
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/23/2012 3:05 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Just one more thought here, Alan, since the original thread was locked.  By conservative estimates we have at least 100 years of natural gas in shale reserves in the USA.  If we unlock these and use nat gas for vehicles and for power generation, we can buy ourselves the time needed to really develop new technologies for energy -- fuel cells, nuclear fusion reactors, much more efficient solar cells, etc.  These technologies are not quite ready for prime time yet, but I have no doubt they will be in the future.  Nat gas is best thought of as a "transition fuel."  It is much cleaner than diesel for powering trucks and it's even cleaner burning than gasoline.  And, of course, in power plants it's much cleaner than coal, though clean coal technologies are helping reduce pollution from coal-fired plants.


I couldn't agree more.  My fear though is that we won't use the time that this buys wisely.  Very few people acknowledge a problem until it hits real close to home.

As for this comment:

We don't wish to referee. If someone wants to set up another forum, I'll be happy to provide a link. As previous experience suggests and as you can see in this thread, these conversations go downhill quickly.

Ted, no one asked you to referee and if you read the thread, it wasn't going downhill fast.  Why not give it a chance and just boot the offenders for a month.  The threat of that sanction will keep the forum clean.  What have you got to lose?

mail
Ted Thompson
2/23/2012 3:21 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Just one more thought here, Alan, since the original thread was locked.  By conservative estimates we have at least 100 years of natural gas in shale reserves in the USA.  If we unlock these and use nat gas for vehicles and for power generation, we can buy ourselves the time needed to really develop new technologies for energy -- fuel cells, nuclear fusion reactors, much more efficient solar cells, etc.  These technologies are not quite ready for prime time yet, but I have no doubt they will be in the future.  Nat gas is best thought of as a "transition fuel."  It is much cleaner than diesel for powering trucks and it's even cleaner burning than gasoline.  And, of course, in power plants it's much cleaner than coal, though clean coal technologies are helping reduce pollution from coal-fired plants.


I couldn't agree more.  My fear though is that we won't use the time that this buys wisely.  Very few people acknowledge a problem until it hits real close to home.

As for this comment:

We don't wish to referee. If someone wants to set up another forum, I'll be happy to provide a link. As previous experience suggests and as you can see in this thread, these conversations go downhill quickly.

Ted, no one asked you to referee and if you read the thread, it wasn't going downhill fast.  Why not give it a chance and just boot the offenders for a month.  The threat of that sanction will keep the forum clean.  What have you got to lose?



You're asking us to boot the offenders for a month. That means we have to read it and be a referee. That's not something any of the moderators care to do. I'm more than happy to link if someone wants to set up a free message board at someplace like http://www.proboards.com/ . 
mail
person
bobcatsquared
2/23/2012 4:02 PM
    OCF, I have no problems with your post in the locked thread (although I disagree with it). My post was about Roger asking Monroe to take his political views elsewhere while not asking you to do the same with your (opposite) political views.
Last Edited: 2/23/2012 4:03:17 PM by bobcatsquared
mail
Ryan Carey
2/23/2012 4:17 PM
http://www.bobcatsattackingbobcatsinsiberia.com is a bit long...but available for you to register Alan.
mail
OhioCatFan
2/23/2012 6:01 PM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
    OCF, I have no problems with your post in the locked thread (although I disagree with it). My post was about Roger asking Monroe to take his political views elsewhere while not asking you to do the same with your (opposite) political views.
  OK, understood.  Thanks for clarifying.
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/23/2012 10:15 PM
Ted Thompson wrote:expand_more
Just one more thought here, Alan, since the original thread was locked.  By conservative estimates we have at least 100 years of natural gas in shale reserves in the USA.  If we unlock these and use nat gas for vehicles and for power generation, we can buy ourselves the time needed to really develop new technologies for energy -- fuel cells, nuclear fusion reactors, much more efficient solar cells, etc.  These technologies are not quite ready for prime time yet, but I have no doubt they will be in the future.  Nat gas is best thought of as a "transition fuel."  It is much cleaner than diesel for powering trucks and it's even cleaner burning than gasoline.  And, of course, in power plants it's much cleaner than coal, though clean coal technologies are helping reduce pollution from coal-fired plants.


I couldn't agree more.  My fear though is that we won't use the time that this buys wisely.  Very few people acknowledge a problem until it hits real close to home.

As for this comment:

We don't wish to referee. If someone wants to set up another forum, I'll be happy to provide a link. As previous experience suggests and as you can see in this thread, these conversations go downhill quickly.

Ted, no one asked you to referee and if you read the thread, it wasn't going downhill fast.  Why not give it a chance and just boot the offenders for a month.  The threat of that sanction will keep the forum clean.  What have you got to lose?



You're asking us to boot the offenders for a month. That means we have to read it and be a referee. That's not something any of the moderators care to do. I'm more than happy to link if someone wants to set up a free message board at someplace like http://www.proboards.com/ . 


You must already be doing that or you wouldn't have locked down Monroe's thread.  Come on Ted, take off your parent hat at let the kids play in the street.
Last Edited: 2/23/2012 10:15:38 PM by Alan Swank
mail
JSF
2/23/2012 10:38 PM
Get your own site if you want to talk politics.

Political talk on a sports board is a terrible idea. It never goes well. People just start resenting each other and the ugliness spills over to other parts of the site.
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/24/2012 9:21 AM
JSF wrote:expand_more
Get your own site if you want to talk politics.

Political talk on a sports board is a terrible idea. It never goes well. People just start resenting each other and the ugliness spills over to other parts of the site.


Terrible and never are pretty strong words.  As a nation we're quickly losing the ability to have intelligent and civil discourse on a wide variety of topics.  No one is asking that we turn this into  a political board.  It would be nice though that if someone does bring something up that it's not censored or locked.  Lord knows that we stray from sports quite a bit as it is.
mail
athena
2/24/2012 10:30 AM
If the moderators don't want to deal with it, I think we should respect their wishes. They do a lot for us as it is to maintain these forums.
mail
JSF
2/25/2012 3:25 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
Get your own site if you want to talk politics.

Political talk on a sports board is a terrible idea. It never goes well. People just start resenting each other and the ugliness spills over to other parts of the site.


Terrible and never are pretty strong words.  As a nation we're quickly losing the ability to have intelligent and civil discourse on a wide variety of topics.


I agree. That's why I said "terrible," bolded, italicized, and underlined it.

And we never had a great capacity to have intelligent and civil discourse. It's just more noticeable now.
mail
person
Alan Swank
2/25/2012 5:18 PM
JSF wrote:expand_more
Get your own site if you want to talk politics.

Political talk on a sports board is a terrible idea. It never goes well. People just start resenting each other and the ugliness spills over to other parts of the site.


Terrible and never are pretty strong words.  As a nation we're quickly losing the ability to have intelligent and civil discourse on a wide variety of topics.


I agree. That's why I said "terrible," bolded, italicized, and underlined it.

And we never had a great capacity to have intelligent and civil discourse. It's just more noticeable now.


I think that we did at one time - sometime after dueling was outlawed and before the talking heads starting pouring gasoline on every topic.  On the flip side, if we truly didn't have that capacity, what's wrong with trying to develop it?

And speaking of discourse, I did have a nice conversation with a young man from the Ozone on Thursday.  He raised some very interesting points and I think we both came to the agreement that there is certainly room for moderation of some chants and the development of more original material.  Wish more folks could have come.
Showing Messages: 1 - 12 of 12
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)