New German 4 seater gets 157 MPG

Production--yes, sources--no. Of course, like anything else, it's
subject to opinions from those who really know.

 

Then don't read my posts.

 

What, me worry?

If she is, then nothing has changed. If you really think there is a
difference in party ambitions, you have not been paying attention. I'd
advise you to get a grip.

< snip raving lunacy >

--
"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
George W. Bush.

"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
Vice President Dick Cheney

 

I was skeptical myself when I first learned about it. But more and
more, it seems to make sense. I don't know how they figured this in,
but according to the engineers, these homes stand a better chance
against earthquakes and tornados than the average wood/brick built
homes. And according to engineers, there is no insulation available
today that can come close to the energy conservation that these
styrofoam homes have. I still don't know that I would build one if
given the chance, but it certainly sounds good on paper. Throw some
solar panels on the roof and perhaps one of these homes could be totally
free from outside sources of energy.

 

Without a doubt.

 

So it is your assertion that these numbers are unavailable? Say it often
enough and it will become truth to a few...

--
"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
George W. Bush.

"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
Vice President Dick Cheney

 

If you are going to post to sci.energy, I'll read them if I like. If you
are going to pass bullshit much like gas, I'll call you on it.

Now show me how we will grow crops that yield 25 quad as it was your
claim. I've shown my numbers.

--
"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
George W. Bush.

"Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy."
Vice President Dick Cheney

 

Good answer!

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Right. Technologically, they're actually on the way out, and will have to
have a turnaround.

 

That's a common misinterpretation of the revelations from Allah. The
suicide murderers will each be spending eternity with 72 *Virginians*.

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')

 

Heh - In one post it's clear that you're just pretending to be a
conservative. Howcome you guys are crossposting into r.a.m.chrylser?

 

Are you kidding? Ramen noodles. It'll feed them for a month.

As for Ray, you guys should resist arguing thermo with him. It's clear he
has no clue what he's saying. If ethanol really is an energy-losing
proposition, then it'll stay that way. When all the farm equipment runs on
ethanol, we'll just have to make ethanol from ethylene to keep the death
spiral circulating.

 

No, not unavailable, just conflicting. One side states that there is
enough to go around for many years while others say quite the opposite.
Who knows? But I think that if we were on the brink of actually running
out of fuel, there would be a consensus.

 

I never stated anything about how much or how we will be able to grow
this supply. And if you think I sound like a fool, simply don't reply.
I don't reply to posts that upset me--why should you?

The fact is, I really don't believe we can supply enough agriculture to
meet the energy needs as well as the food products needed to sustain
affordable consumption. With the energy prices what they are, the US is
in a panic and rush to produce new energy sources since we shied from
challenging the Environmentalists. On our current path, we are still
cutting off supply while the demand increases. We need to get rid of
these dozens of blends of fuels to take the pressure off the refineries
while at the same time, stay on the path of alternative fuels.

 

The real question here is, why in the world would anybody end their life
to spend eternity with 72 inexperienced women??????

 

So in your wisdom, you believe that there will be no further advancement
in the production of such fuels? What we are dealing with here is the
Model-T in alternative fuels today. There is certainly no reason to
believe that if successful, we can't improve the technology for cleaner
fuels and less energy to produce them.

 

I don't think there is much doubt that there is some sort of climate change
going on. The real question is whether human intervention has anything to
do with it.

There has been cyclical climate change recorded for centuries.

DAS

For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

[...]

[...]

 

Dori A Schmetterling wrote:

Bingo!!

Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')