Thats kind of weird, but a pretty good idea. Lots of money to be made, I imagine. It says on the FAQ page it uses both maritime and country flag laws? What kind of jobs would be available living on a ship?

Can I bring 'Miss Daisy', My '60 Fintail, on board with me? The salt air would probably not be good for her though!

Happy Motoring, Mark

__________________
DrDKW

Its a country everything from construction to professional services would be available, they even need air traffic controllers.

How did this thread make sticky? its not political and I'll can it myself if it gets stupid.

...too late.

Yeah, part of the problem is that consumers aren't usually allowed to choose between different energy sources (most gas stations where I live don't even carry diesel, let alone say biodiesel or wvo or hydrogen or electrical hookups - or say electricity generation), and part of the problem is that petroleum is still relatively inexpensive. I think I read an article awhile back that gasoline had to be consistently above $3/gallon for 6 months before people would be expected to alter their driving habits on a large scale.

And of course when we do run out, it'll be anyone's guess how long it will take to find oil substitutes. I mean, I guess we could go all nuclear for the grid (yeah right), and build electric cars, but what would you do for airplanes, for example? Can't run those on electricity... And plastic, where do you get the stuff to make plastic?

The construction boom in Asia is gobbling up all the concrete and steel too. One of the cost drivers for the multi-$$$$$ increase in costs for the SF bay bridge has been a drastic jump in the cost of raw materials to build the bridge.

They had an article in the SF Chron about that. Who knows, it might actually happen. It almost seems like one of those 50s futuristic pipe dreams, but this one could happen.

SeaWorld, here we come.

I wonder if they'd form their own, democratically controlled security protocol? Seems like they'd need to have a constitution of sorts (?!?).

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

Please don't. This is a good 'un. Ya nailed it MedMech. But now.... Oh God, we do we always destroy what we create? (tortured sobs)

I'm starting to believe that anyone who can put together a functioning alt. fuel scene is liable to be a valuable commodity one day soon. Part of my grief with growth minded Republicans, like Bush, is they don't seem that interested in actually using the considerable lead time we now have to the best advantage.

If we end up relying on heavy use on tar sands, shale oil, and coal tar as petroleum peters out, it's still just a matter of time before it's gone. And the damage that could well result from those methods, if fully tapped to provide current levels of BTUs, is not a pretty vision of my children's future.

I read somewhere about a farmer who was farming rapeseed (canola) for fuel oil, and was running all his equipment on his own bio brew. I also understand you can substitute ethanol for methanol in making biodiesel but it takes a good setup and is more difficult.

If a bio-diesel oil farm cannot run it's own machinery on a small fraction of it's produce, we're in trouble. That's the big debate in ethanol at the moment -- I mean I don't know how big the debate is, but: Does ethanol production from corn produce more energy than it uses? Other kinds of ethanol are more efficient perhaps, like using rice straw to make it (doing it here in No. Cal), but there's only so much of that.

I have mixed feelings about the notion of getting anywhere near current BTU levels from ethanol produced from agriculture. I just wonder if the earth could sustain it -- what would be the cost in water and soil.

But, maybe with the proper permaculture like setup, it could work with oil. I have this fantasy about a demonstration farm: oil, ethanol, biodiesel. Hell, we'll use it as a country acadamy for ADS teenagers and put those snots to work. Make documentaries n' stuff. But first, you'd have to know it works.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

I mentioned in another thread that my Avalanche is a flex fuel vehichle and I will have no problem with ethanol and it's .50 cents less a gallon than petrol.

I was at a dinner last night and sqeezed in a talk with a very smart local guy. We joked about automotive board rooms sitting around and no being able to think out side fossil fuels. I do think that flexible fuel cars and trucks is a first step and a fairly conservitive one.

To late. We started to conserve with small cars and 55mph years ago, but never followed through. Now we’ll simply adapt to our environment as we are forced too. Basically you aint seen nothing yet, but we’re starting to get the message that this isn’t a conspiracy of the evil multinationals.
It’s the end game - everybody in the know is making all they can while the getting is good because it’s gonna take a lifetime or two to restart the motor.
You can build condos with cow ***** straw and twigs, but it will take a big attitude adjustment. Meanwhile, over in the worlds all time fastest growing economy - When China finally blows it's nose the whole world catches a cold.

__________________
89 300E
79 240D
72 Westy
63 Bug sunroof
85 Jeep CJ7
86 Chevy 6.2l diesel PU

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
Marcus Aurelius

A big factor is that cars also are made to last a lot longer. In the 70s, the entire fleet could be recycled in a few years, because the cars were all crap anyway. It is going to take us longer to scrap the insanity of the SUV era, where mom drives a six ton behemoth capable of scaling mountain ranges to get her hair done. The usual way to speed up the process, tax them out of existance, is impossible in the current era, so we will have to suffer economic dislocation instead.

3 ton.

Almost all GM trucks are now flex fuel, explain that one. Your old sl, is by far much worse than a suburban with pollutants and utility.

Oh man, them dudes are clawing and scratching their way up the wall. My sister got an MBA a couple years back (pray that it works out for her) and she later got onto a deal teaching business classes to junior college type students in China. She caught this scene on the street one day, certain that I would like it:


Guess they don't have OSHA in China...

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

I think the simplest act is to put folks in office who will provide progressive incentives for energy efficiency in everything from packaging to transport to heating to, well, you name it. There is no one thing, there are dozens, and includes many things we haven’t thought of yet. The first step is simply to try.

Here’s an example of what I’m getting at: the gov offers me a tax discount for business use of my vehicles. Now if they conditioned that so that I’d only get that discount if my vehicles got, make up a number such as 35 MPG, I would make the move to keep my deductions in place.

Here’s another one: again, the gov permits me to discount the amount of interest expense I pay for my residence. If they were to only provide this discount were the home up to the latest energy efficiency codes, and naturally also provide a tax discount for making the upgrades. Lets say that the entire cost of the renovations can be deducted over a 1 year or 5 year period, you’d have a HUGE number of folks who would do this. Several industries would be born or expand over night. Now the only way to achieve this and get a deduction is to buy a new and up to code house, or you can get interest expense from a home equity line of credit. Desire for the home equity line is cooling quickly due to the increase of the variable rates under which they are sold. Increasing rates serves as a disincentive for folks to spend, even though they do get a tax discount for the interest expense.

Folks who make a middle to good living are those who get taxed at the highest rate. The incentives given these folks are what drives the market places.

So the goal would be to simply provide incentives to be more energy efficient.

Another simple example that effects almost every one of use is the monitor(s) we use for our computers. IIRC, a LCD runs on about 20% of the energy of a CRT, plus is a lot less expensive to make. So if 100 million or so of use got rid of our CRTs we’d save probably billions of $$ in energy use alone. And lets not even talk about the risks of a CRT and the ultimate medical expenses related to it. Again, simple incentives provided by the gov would make all the difference.

But the current administration isn’t interested in providing choice or incentive. The are interested in SFB arrogance. Period.

__________________
...Tracy

'00 ML320 "Casper"
'92 400E "Stella"