Thanks, Springer. that's a perfect Washington quote for this election.
Especially for those who now say they support Mr. Trump. It has become quite clear that DJT is a loose cannon. It doesn't matter what he said yesterday, because he could easily say just the opposite today. No one can tell which end of that loose cannon they will be facing if Trump became president.
On the other hand, both his remaining opponents have been very clear on where they stand, and neither has changed their stance much at all. We all will find ourselves having to chose between the liberal Trump, and the (more) conservative Hillary. As Washington said, "in the delusive hope that power, in such [Trumpian] hands, will always be wielded against their adversaries, never against themselves.”
I'd always prefer someone in charge who I know where they stand, rather than someone who tries to stand everywhere, and who moves from position to position at random times.
Sadly, for some people the only way they can understand the things going on around them is to find someone to blame, it seems. They never seem to be interested in finding out what really happened, or why. And they are also uninterested in finding solutions for the problems that might be fixed. It's sad, really, because they are unwilling to work to fix what's broken, and so they often simply let things get worse, rather than putting in some effort to make them better.
It's been especially difficult to watch our current Congress spending all their time trying to affix blame, rather than simply fixing what is broken. As a result, nothing gets fixed, and the situation often gets worse, as attention is never focused on fixing the problems.
We could get into the same argument about Christianity being not a religion, but an ideology, as well.
But that doesn't matter, as long as we live in the USA, with our Constitution as our law of the land. The first amendment explicitly says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." so as soon as Congress writes any law that explicitly applies only to Christians, or to Muslims, it becomes unconstitutional.
So that argument about ideology and religion becomes mute., and a waste of both out times.
It means that if we have to wait until Trump figures out what is going on, he will never get anything done. (Both Trump and Cruz seemed to use the royal we.)
There is a huge legal difference between a country and a religion. Should we have sent all Catholics home (or put them in concentration camps) when were were at war with Italy?
It? California has a a little more than a 40% greater population that Texas. You're saying that because of that, California uses more federal money? Maybe that's so, but as far as food stamps are concerned, and these numbers presented here, California seems to get less federal food stamp money than Texas - but maybe makes better use of them, as they keep more people off of food stamps with the lesser amount of money they do get.
So we will depend on background checks done by other countries? In that case, there's no problem, and we can all go home and and stop arguing. Every Muslim traveler can find a country that will give him a green light and let him, or her, travel to America.
Yes, sadly, some troops will prefer loose cannons, over someone who would prefer not to use any cannon, if at all possible. The problem with loose cannons, is that you never know who is going to get hit, or by what... And with Trump, those troops will never know which end of that cannon they will be facing, just like every other citizen.
Actually, there are none that have been successful in Europe, although a few have been mothballed there. The functioning plasma gasification plants in the world are currently located in Taiwan, India, Japan, and China, and also one on the USS Gerald Ford carrier. (the USS Ford nuclear power plant has plenty of additional free energy to use).
And all of these are used to dispose of waste materials, not for coal. And I doubt that the waste streams would include as much toxic stuff as the coal. The coal includes toxins like arsenic, and mercury, and lead. Human waste streams don't include much of these toxic elements, but instead toxic organic chemicals that are broken down in hot fires or plasma arcs.
Springer: "coal is still in use"
No one is arguing that coal is still in use. Coal will still be "in use" for decades to come.
What is important is that the use of coal is dropping like a brick now. Coal is a shrinking, not a growing business. No intelligent investor would invest their money in coal. They are investing in the alternatives, and in the tools being used to reduce the use of coal, and to reduce coal's impact on our health and welfare. (How much have you invested in Peabody Energy, Arch Coal, or Alpha Natural Resources, lately?)
And don't even consider the possibility of big countries like India or China using much coal in the future. India is investing very heavily in solar power, and they know that the cost of solar is now about equal to coal power. And the Indians say that solar will be 10% cheaper than coal there in 3 or 4 years. (May already be the case here.) Even in China, the biggest user of coal, coal consumption, and production peaked in 2013, and has dropped since then. Coal is a shrinking industry, worldwide, and we are not going to see any growth again. The only remaining question now is how fast coal use drops, and how quickly alternatives come on line.
Soringer, the use of coal in Germany and Sweden has dropped over the past decade. It's been replaced by renewables, and (in the case of Sweden) nuclear power.Sweden has announced that they plan to be the first country that uses renewable power, entirely. Both Sweden and Germany have big issues with coal use, and they plan to stop using coal as soon as possible.
I didn't look up what has been happening in Poland (you can do that), but I expect their plans are not much different from those of their neighbors.
Coal is just too expensive in so many ways that most every business leader and nation that uses coal is looking for ways to replace it. The only argument is how quickly they can do it.
Plasma gasification plants have been built in a few places, but only for waste disposal, not coal conversion. And the reason is simple. In almost all cases, those plants use more energy than they produce to maintain those big electric arcs to do the plasma conversion.
Springer: "Other countries use it and have NO issues."
Ahh, what other countries?? Just askin' because we'd all like to know.
That should be "Either GET SUED BY those who's water and air has been poisoned" Sorry for the typo..
Either those who's water and air has been poisoned by the power companies, or or we make it illegal to to poison our water and air.
Tobacco companies managed to use the "get themselves sued" route. for the past half century. That route hasn't worked well for them. Tobacco use is still down by 75% over that past decades, and they've been in court for all that time, too.
The coal industry and power plants that burn coal aren't going to do any better, whether they take the "let's get sued" route, or follow laws to keep air and water clean. The use of coal is dropping fast because businesses and business owners are mostly smart enough to know that they lose either way. The choice in most cases is either bankruptcy or leaving now with what money you have, and investing in something that is more profitable.
Ideal, except that as the road wears down tiny particles of arsenic, lead, mercury, and other toxic or cancerous particles enter the air, and make those who live nearby sick. Why should any power plant owner or road builder even consider putting themselves at risk for lawsuits and having to deal with toxic wastes, when much better alternatives, both for generating power, and for building roads are available? (Remember, most business owners want to make a profit, not create weeks spent in court, and having to deal with tons of toxic waste.) Slag has even been proposed as a good material to make school tracks and playgrounds. I'm sure that goes over well with the parents of all those school kids! Send those kids out to play in the arsenic and lead! And, of course, if your home is along a road paved with that slag, your front yard is already well covered with all those toxins.
And that arsenic is just like the silicon - not a metal, but much more toxic than the silicon.
"A plasma torch powered by an electric arc, is used to ionize gas and catalyze organic matter into synthetic gas and solid waste (slag)."
With plasma gasification, the same carbon and hydrogen is removed. The same waste products, including lead, mercury, arsenic, boron, etc. remain. The ONLY difference is that with plasma, it's called slag, rather than ash. And those making and using cement, brick, and other products, don't really care if it's called ash or slag if the same toxic stuff is to be installed in their homes.
That is also true! Many, if not most, don't want their foundations, roadways, chimneys, and garden walkways infused with lead, mercury, arsenic, chromium, boron, uranium, and more. As those conservative Republicans used to say, "let the customer decide!".
"Non carbon / hydrogen elements" in coal are what make up the more than 100 million tons of coal ash and flue gas desulphurization product that are produced at American coal fired power plants every year. Less than 40 million tons of that ash are used in the concrete products, glass, bricks, and gypsum panels that are produced each year. We just don't make and use enough concrete and bricks to use all the toxic ash produced every year. Power plants are giving it away, and if there were a use for it, it would be used.
But it's not!
And he said he Loved Atlantic City, and Trump Tower Tampa, too. How did they work out? And you still trust him with your guns and taxes? Some people just never learn...