We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
get started.

Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.

That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?

I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
Generals do a coup d'etat).

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com...
> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.

You forget one little obstacle. The "Not in my backyard" crowd.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com...
> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.

You forget one little obstacle. The "Not in my backyard" crowd.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

"Nomen Nescio" <nobody@dizum.com> wrote in message
news:6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com...
> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.

You forget one little obstacle. The "Not in my backyard" crowd.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to get
around more.

Jeff

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to get
around more.

Jeff

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to get
around more.

Jeff

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil


The first sentence turned me off right away. "people owned"? I hate
those words because it reminds me of the old U.S.S,R.

You must be a socialist.
--
"[It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system."

-- Vice President Al Gore

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil


The first sentence turned me off right away. "people owned"? I hate
those words because it reminds me of the old U.S.S,R.

You must be a socialist.
--
"[It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system."

-- Vice President Al Gore

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>,
Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil


The first sentence turned me off right away. "people owned"? I hate
those words because it reminds me of the old U.S.S,R.

You must be a socialist.
--
"[It's] time for the human race to enter the solar system."

-- Vice President Al Gore

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.
>
> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).

The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
for it---NIMBY--.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.
>
> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).

The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
for it---NIMBY--.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
> get started.
>
> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).

The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
for it---NIMBY--.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant

> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>

But you would still be an idiot!
I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
no-sir!

Life is so simple for the simple minded...


--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant

> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>

But you would still be an idiot!
I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
no-sir!

Life is so simple for the simple minded...


--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
> conversion plant

> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>

But you would still be an idiot!
I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
no-sir!

Life is so simple for the simple minded...


--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:50:01 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>get started.
>
>Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
>That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
>I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>Generals do a coup d'etat).


Exactly what South Africa did when the UN sanctions were on them in
the sixties/seventies. Made all their own gasoline from coal, and
their gas cost less in 1973 than real gas dis in Zambia, who could buy
wherever they wanted.
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:50:01 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>get started.
>
>Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
>That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
>I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>Generals do a coup d'etat).


Exactly what South Africa did when the UN sanctions were on them in
the sixties/seventies. Made all their own gasoline from coal, and
their gas cost less in 1973 than real gas dis in Zambia, who could buy
wherever they wanted.
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:50:01 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
<nobody@dizum.com> wrote:

>The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>get started.
>
>Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>
>That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>
>I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>Generals do a coup d'etat).


Exactly what South Africa did when the UN sanctions were on them in
the sixties/seventies. Made all their own gasoline from coal, and
their gas cost less in 1973 than real gas dis in Zambia, who could buy
wherever they wanted.
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:


>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> name for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.

No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
drill.





--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:


>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> name for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.

No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
drill.





--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:


>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> name for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.

No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
drill.





--
Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:35:49 -0700, jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
>The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
>built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
>Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
>Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
>Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
>no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
>Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
>for it---NIMBY--.
>Jason
Forget coat to oil - when was the last OIL REFINERY built in the
USA????
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:35:49 -0700, jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
>The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
>built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
>Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
>Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
>Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
>no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
>Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
>for it---NIMBY--.
>Jason
Forget coat to oil - when was the last OIL REFINERY built in the
USA????
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

On Wed, 19 Apr 2006 14:35:49 -0700, jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:

>In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
><nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
>The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
>built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
>Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
>Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
>Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
>no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
>Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
>for it---NIMBY--.
>Jason
Forget coat to oil - when was the last OIL REFINERY built in the
USA????
*** Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com ***

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

No need to wait, the President has already provided 100 million in federal
money to do almost exactly that, as part of his plan to reduce our
dependency on imported crude. It is not gasoline from coal but clean
burning, low sulfur, diesel fuel.

A plant is being built as we speak in Schuylkill County Pennsylvania that
will convert coal calm (waste coal) into fuel to be used by the state of
Pennsylvania. Eastern Pennsylvania has the world largest reserves of
clean burning low sulfur anthracite coal. Using new coal would be more
costly than using culm. Even producing diesel fuel from waste coal cost
much more the conventional fuel oil and much more than it would coat to
produce gasoline. The only thing that is making that plant cost effective
is the Company has been given a ten year tax exemption, under Pennsylvania's
Keystone development plan that is designed to return "brown fields,"
polluted areas, into tax producing lands. In addition the diesel fuel will
not be taxed by the state of federal government. The current federal tax is
..185c per gallon and the Pa state tax is .26C The sad part is even at $70
a barrel gasoline is still so cheap as a motor fuel that crude will need to
go over $100 a barrel before ANY of the alternate fuel will cost less and
can be sold at a profit.

Search "The Bud Angst Report » Blog Archive » PA Leads With Coal-to-Oil
Solution To Address Energy Needs"


mike hunt



"Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97AAB7EE1F223pettyfogery@207.115.17.102...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant
>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. >
> But you would still be an idiot!
> I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
> no-sir!
>
> Life is so simple for the simple minded...
>
>
> --
> Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
> you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

No need to wait, the President has already provided 100 million in federal
money to do almost exactly that, as part of his plan to reduce our
dependency on imported crude. It is not gasoline from coal but clean
burning, low sulfur, diesel fuel.

A plant is being built as we speak in Schuylkill County Pennsylvania that
will convert coal calm (waste coal) into fuel to be used by the state of
Pennsylvania. Eastern Pennsylvania has the world largest reserves of
clean burning low sulfur anthracite coal. Using new coal would be more
costly than using culm. Even producing diesel fuel from waste coal cost
much more the conventional fuel oil and much more than it would coat to
produce gasoline. The only thing that is making that plant cost effective
is the Company has been given a ten year tax exemption, under Pennsylvania's
Keystone development plan that is designed to return "brown fields,"
polluted areas, into tax producing lands. In addition the diesel fuel will
not be taxed by the state of federal government. The current federal tax is
..185c per gallon and the Pa state tax is .26C The sad part is even at $70
a barrel gasoline is still so cheap as a motor fuel that crude will need to
go over $100 a barrel before ANY of the alternate fuel will cost less and
can be sold at a profit.

Search "The Bud Angst Report » Blog Archive » PA Leads With Coal-to-Oil
Solution To Address Energy Needs"


mike hunt



"Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97AAB7EE1F223pettyfogery@207.115.17.102...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant
>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. >
> But you would still be an idiot!
> I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
> no-sir!
>
> Life is so simple for the simple minded...
>
>
> --
> Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
> you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

No need to wait, the President has already provided 100 million in federal
money to do almost exactly that, as part of his plan to reduce our
dependency on imported crude. It is not gasoline from coal but clean
burning, low sulfur, diesel fuel.

A plant is being built as we speak in Schuylkill County Pennsylvania that
will convert coal calm (waste coal) into fuel to be used by the state of
Pennsylvania. Eastern Pennsylvania has the world largest reserves of
clean burning low sulfur anthracite coal. Using new coal would be more
costly than using culm. Even producing diesel fuel from waste coal cost
much more the conventional fuel oil and much more than it would coat to
produce gasoline. The only thing that is making that plant cost effective
is the Company has been given a ten year tax exemption, under Pennsylvania's
Keystone development plan that is designed to return "brown fields,"
polluted areas, into tax producing lands. In addition the diesel fuel will
not be taxed by the state of federal government. The current federal tax is
..185c per gallon and the Pa state tax is .26C The sad part is even at $70
a barrel gasoline is still so cheap as a motor fuel that crude will need to
go over $100 a barrel before ANY of the alternate fuel will cost less and
can be sold at a profit.

Search "The Bud Angst Report » Blog Archive » PA Leads With Coal-to-Oil
Solution To Address Energy Needs"


mike hunt



"Backyard Mechanic" <pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote in message
news:Xns97AAB7EE1F223pettyfogery@207.115.17.102...
> Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant
>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. >
> But you would still be an idiot!
> I think 'people-owned' is significant... Aint no crooks in them communes,
> no-sir!
>
> Life is so simple for the simple minded...
>
>
> --
> Yeh, I'm a Krusty old Geezer, putting up with my 'smartass' is the price
> you pay..DEAL with it!

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <Xns97AAB9CD7E410pettyfogery@207.115.17.102>, Backyard Mechanic
<pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote:

> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>
> >
> > The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> > be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> > Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> > that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> > new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> > because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> > Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> > name for it---NIMBY--.
> > Jason
> >
>
> Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
> absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.
>
> No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
> should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
> drill.

In New Orleans--the Fed's should not allow anything to be built in those
areas that were destroyed during the last hurricane. Someone stated,
"Let's rebuild New Orleans in a different part of the state that is ABOVE
sea level."
I agree with the person that made that statement. However, they will not
follow this advice. The end result will be that New Orleans will be
destroyed again within the next 10 years by another hurricane. It's kind
of like rebuilding a house located next to a large river everytime there
is a flood.
New Orleans should be declared "Wetlands". The Fed's protect the Wetlands
in some areas but they don't seem to care about the fact that New Orleans
is a
Wetland.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <Xns97AAB9CD7E410pettyfogery@207.115.17.102>, Backyard Mechanic
<pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote:

> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>
> >
> > The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> > be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> > Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> > that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> > new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> > because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> > Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> > name for it---NIMBY--.
> > Jason
> >
>
> Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
> absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.
>
> No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
> should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
> drill.

In New Orleans--the Fed's should not allow anything to be built in those
areas that were destroyed during the last hurricane. Someone stated,
"Let's rebuild New Orleans in a different part of the state that is ABOVE
sea level."
I agree with the person that made that statement. However, they will not
follow this advice. The end result will be that New Orleans will be
destroyed again within the next 10 years by another hurricane. It's kind
of like rebuilding a house located next to a large river everytime there
is a flood.
New Orleans should be declared "Wetlands". The Fed's protect the Wetlands
in some areas but they don't seem to care about the fact that New Orleans
is a
Wetland.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

In article <Xns97AAB9CD7E410pettyfogery@207.115.17.102>, Backyard Mechanic
<pettyfog@yaywho.com> wrote:

> jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
>
>
> >
> > The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to
> > be built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear
> > Power Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down
> > that Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a
> > new Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is
> > because no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to
> > Oil Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a
> > name for it---NIMBY--.
> > Jason
> >
>
> Read the Washington Post op-ed... not just nimby, now it's BANANAs (build
> absolutely nothing anywhere near anything.
>
> No it's time for people to take action alright. First step: The Fed's
> should reclaim all territory 12 miles off the beach in the Gulf and
> drill.

In New Orleans--the Fed's should not allow anything to be built in those
areas that were destroyed during the last hurricane. Someone stated,
"Let's rebuild New Orleans in a different part of the state that is ABOVE
sea level."
I agree with the person that made that statement. However, they will not
follow this advice. The end result will be that New Orleans will be
destroyed again within the next 10 years by another hurricane. It's kind
of like rebuilding a house located next to a large river everytime there
is a flood.
New Orleans should be declared "Wetlands". The Fed's protect the Wetlands
in some areas but they don't seem to care about the fact that New Orleans
is a
Wetland.
Jason

--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seekm to welcome a coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seekm to welcome a coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seekm to welcome a coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seem to welcome the coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seem to welcome the coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

The folks in Schuylkill County Pa do not agree with your assessment, they
seem to welcome the coal conversion plant being build there ;)


mike hunt





"Jason" <jason@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:jason-1904061435490001@66-52-22-69.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net...
> In article <6e44b58d2c244460da06f2402dd9e1da@dizum.com>, Nomen Nescio
> <nobody@dizum.com> wrote:
>
>> The People of the United States could build a people-owned coal-to-oil
>> conversion plant and extract as much gasoline, from domestic coal, as we
>> need, independently of foreign nations. We could just about balance our
>> budget just on that one item alone. Just call it Manhattan Project II
>> and
>> get started.
>>
>> Gasoline would be cheap and stay that way, once foreigners, greedy oil
>> companies, and profits are taken out of the picture. And even if it
>> wasn't
>> cheap, its still cheap enough compared to losing our manhood to the Arab
>> sheiks, Venezuelan strongman, Nigerian Mau-mau, and so on down the line.
>>
>> That is, if we wanted to. Call the troops home today and we will have
>> collectively, $1,500,000,000.00 a month to invest in Manhattan Project II
>> until its done. Put it to the vote of the people: Do they want
>> gasoline-a-plenty at low cost for ourselves and generations to come, or
>> do
>> they want to see our beloved country go bankcrupt...to Hell in a
>> handbasket
>> with empty tanked SUV cars and Pickups littering the landscape and
>> cemetaries full of their dead soldier-children?
>>
>> I'm waiting, Mr. President. Please answer before the impeachment
>> proceedings begin to put you out of the warmongering business (or the
>> Generals do a coup d'etat).
>
> The problem is that no town or city wants any type of power plant to be
> built in their back yard. I live in a county that has a Nuclear Power
> Plant. The liberals in this state have been trying to close down that
> Nuclear Power Plant for the past 20 years. There has not been a new
> Nuclear Power Plant built in the past 20 years. The reason is because
> no person in America wants a Nuclear Power plant or a Coal to Oil
> Conversion Plant to be built in their back yard. There is even a name
> for it---NIMBY--.
> Jason
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

That is a good idea, the only problem is it will not solve the problem. It
will reduce the INCREASE in the amount of oil we import but not our need for
the fast amounts of crude we use to fuel the various economies of the world.
Gasoline is only a small part of why we need to import crude. The people
in every other major industrial country in the world pays a lot more for
gasoline than do we, and they are still using more every year. If every
vehicle in the US miraculously got twice as many miles per gallon some day
we would still need crude for it carbon stocks and the excess gasoline would
simply be burned off at the refineries, as it was before it became a motor
fuel.


mike hunt




"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cyx1g.9071$i41.2217@newsread1.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
> Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
> alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
> efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to
> get around more.
>
> Jeff
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

That is a good idea, the only problem is it will not solve the problem. It
will reduce the INCREASE in the amount of oil we import but not our need for
the fast amounts of crude we use to fuel the various economies of the world.
Gasoline is only a small part of why we need to import crude. The people
in every other major industrial country in the world pays a lot more for
gasoline than do we, and they are still using more every year. If every
vehicle in the US miraculously got twice as many miles per gallon some day
we would still need crude for it carbon stocks and the excess gasoline would
simply be burned off at the refineries, as it was before it became a motor
fuel.


mike hunt




"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cyx1g.9071$i41.2217@newsread1.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
> Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
> alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
> efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to
> get around more.
>
> Jeff
>

Re: We Could Build a Coal-to-Gasoline Conversion Plant
 

That is a good idea, the only problem is it will not solve the problem. It
will reduce the INCREASE in the amount of oil we import but not our need for
the fast amounts of crude we use to fuel the various economies of the world.
Gasoline is only a small part of why we need to import crude. The people
in every other major industrial country in the world pays a lot more for
gasoline than do we, and they are still using more every year. If every
vehicle in the US miraculously got twice as many miles per gallon some day
we would still need crude for it carbon stocks and the excess gasoline would
simply be burned off at the refineries, as it was before it became a motor
fuel.


mike hunt




"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Cyx1g.9071$i41.2217@newsread1.news.atl.earthl ink.net...
> Better yet, you we could build fuel-efficient motor vehicles, develop
> alternative sources of energy that don't cause global warming, improve the
> efficiency of our houses, and use buses, subways, bikes and our feet to
> get around more.
>
> Jeff
>