Originally Posted by Mariss Freimanis  Kind of disappointed with post #190. An ill-constructed question followed by a facile and pedestrian answer to a self-serving setup question, all in the same post no less. Something dumb from someone I expected better of. In a word, sophomoric.
What prompts my post is I remember reading about a Swedish or Norwegian theorist who suggested oil is not a fossil fuel at all but instead is being continually synthesized from primordial carbon and water deep within the earth's mantle. It then oozes upwards into the crust to form oil fields. Evidently the theory was good enough to have some very deep wells drilled in an attempt to test idea. Does anyone know what eventually came of it?
Mariss |
Hi Mariss,
Facile, pedestrian and sophomoric all in one post? I knew I was good but I didn't think I was that good! Surly you'll allow me a little hyperbole in addressing a problem of the magnitude we're discussing. I was just saying that there are alternatives out there that would be competitive with $60 a barrel oil. Look at what we have now, over $90 a barrel. We have not had the political leadership to move us in the direction we need to go. My point is that reducing oil usage is paramount. It's also doable. The government through fuel taxes, could stabilize the price of gasoline at a level high enough to encourage the development of alternative sources. With gas at bargain basement prices, where's the incentive to save?
Donna