@Stefan Payne, water energy (i.e. dams, tidal, etc) has a lot of potential. So does offshore wind which is much more reliable than onshore wind.

Yeah, I agree with that...

Land Wind is kinda shit as there are days without Wind. No idea about offshore Wind though.

and water is a darn strong power that gets underestimated by many people...

because they forget that you can cut steel with Water.

Try carrying 5 gallons of water sometime and you get a true idea of the power of moving water

@devpav, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_III_reactor and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

No idea about how much a Gallon is 😛

:p 3.78 liters

Fuck that Imperial cancer shit 😛

Offshore wind just has much higher capital cost than onshore wind. And at the end of the day it's still wind power.

Modern nuclear fission is pretty exciting

And unlike fusion, real designs keep coming out

I've read a fair amount about advanced reactors, 10th, especially MSR. MSR gets all the hype.

MSR was proven for generating electric power in the '60s. Yet we still chase the fusion pipe dream.

@Stefan Payne a british gallon is 4.5 litres and US gallon is at listed above by @DrYuriMom

@Stefan Payne that would mean _Fuck that US shit_ not _fuck that imperial shit_ 😝

power of 10 FTW.

1 Kilogramm = 1000 gramm

I'd love to move to a mix of nuclear, wind, water and solar with a highly electricity-based energy system and when excess power is being produced it is used to create H2 which would then be used to power cars, trains, turboprobs, etc so that fossil fuels would be relegated to the military and plastics production for the most part. Rather efficient biofuels could even be used for commercial jets. With such a change, we'd no longer have to send money for oil to people who hate us. After 9/11 this is what i hoped we'd do, instead we spent a trillion dollars for pretty much nothing but a whole lot of trouble.

Most of the terrorists in 9/11 came from Saudi Arabia. I want to send that whole region back to camel herding.

Hmm, I disagree with just about everything you said.

That's why I posted it in debate

Except for reducing Saudi Arabia back to camel herding.

lol

Can I point towards our Expat Pariah Ryan Dawson?

Well, let's start that I don't think utterly destroying the economic capacity of an entire nation's people is a very moral thing to do.

@Bookworm depends on the Nation and why we are doing it.

if we doing it because they Export Terror and finance Terrorcells, is it wrong?

^^

If it were to happen as an unfortunate, undesired effect of peacekeeping in the region, that's another issue entirely.

To do so unintentionally is wrong.

We have a right to spend our money where we want. They can start making other stuff if they can get their act together.

If no one needs their oil anymore, how sad. /s

How many Jihadists had connections to Saudis, were member of a Saudi Mosque or financed by them in any way?

I think the US is already outproducing Saudi Arabia.

For now we are, but there is more than enough demand in the world that money is still flowing to the Gulf

Confirmed @DrYuriMom wants to se me in the unemployment lines 😝

If Europe, Japan, China, and US no longer needs oil, problem solved.

Hey Critter, I'm sure you're clever enough to join the new nuclear/hydrogen/electricity economy

Well, we can only compete with Saudi Arabia in the global oil market to reduce other countries' demand for Saudi oil.

Until we can widely promulgate an alternative to oil, money will still flow to people who hate us