My new (I HOPE) Car........... Why I oughta...: My new (I HOPE) Car...........

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 08:23 am:

By patrick on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 12:59 pm:

    are you gonna go off roading with that? whats the gas mileage?

By semillama on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:07 pm:

    Are you kidding? Does that look like it's really meant to go off-road?

    The Jeep Liberty, however . . .

    According to Motor Trend, it is a worthy successor to the late Cherokee.

By Nate on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:10 pm:

    i had sex in a jeep cherokee once.

    i thought the santa fe was targeted at picky hitchhikers.

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:43 pm:

    21-28 mpg, not planning on off roading, no.

By patrick on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:48 pm:

    thats kinda my point sem.

    consumers are finding themselves empowered with the typical americano rugged sense of independence these machines offer. I suspect it is designed more for trips to the mall and soccer practice than it is for off roading, but the image the manufacture portrays.....well...i don't need to spell it out.

    I just wish I had a billy club of sense and logic for every SUVdriver.

    This machine appears to be an SUV-lite, like those Honda CRVs and Toyota...shit what are they called....uhhhh...anyway..they look like Suzuki Samari's and we know what utter failures those lunch boxes were.

By patrick on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:53 pm:

    my honda gets 35/40....

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:02 pm:

    Dude, I live in the city, so there is not much of a need to off road, it get ok milage (same as my sunbird), and looks nice, that is why I want it. Oh, as far as it being "Americano", most SUV's are made outside the US

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:04 pm:

    at least it is not this:


By patrick on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:28 pm:

    indeed, those are big fucking trucks. That was kinda of my point, you live in the city, yet they are selling you (an image anyway) a vehicle that appears to be made for the offroad. Look at the background they photographed it under.

    Who cares where SUVs are made, that wasn't my point.

    America has a history of a notion called "Manifest Destiny" the 1800's it involved brutal expansion through out the America west, it was and still is, in my mind a sense of entitlement and independence. This is a cornerstone in american culture...Our cars symbolize who we THINK we are. Our cars are symbols and extensions of our perceptions....and SUVs do nothing more than fuel that desire for independence. Thats why every god damn SUV commercial depicts some sort of off-roading. "Going where no man has gone before!" They rarely correctly depict the soccer mom who can barely see over the steering wheel much less the poor VW she just rolled over to her left racing down city streets to the grocery store, yoga class, starbucks and then soccer practice. They rarely depict the one driver in every one of these big assed fuckers, they always depict a family. Next time you are in traffic, notice all the SUVs and take an average of how many people are in one at any given time.

    Its this false sense of entitlement that drives me nuts. No sense of community or regard for me me.

    (enter rant)

    In my neighborhood, they recently made a strip of Silverlake Blvd. permit parking. Meaning, you cant park on the street unless you have a permit purchased from the city, and this applies usually after 6pm, until dawn.

    My neighborhood is booming, however this local legislation was sponsored by the homeowners, and was reprimanded by the one establishment it inevitably saught to hurt, Spaceland. Spaceland has been a local disco (80s) and now its a hot trendy hipster joint that features decent local and international acts. Anyway the neighbors were tired of the 2 am noise so they pushed to have the streets permited. There is no where else to park.

    Home owners complain they have no place to park their cars in the evenings with out these permits....this has never been a problem until the neighborhood started getting popular. (Funny how all the problems start when the whites come to town, when my neighborhood was predominatly gay and latino, there were never issues like this) I spoke with a homeowner recently and she was like, well we only have a one car garage, and i understand why homeowners would support this. I asked her when she bought her house, was there any gurantee of public parking, meaning, did her contract include a portion of the street? She said of course not. And I responded, fuck you and your sense of entitlement. when you buy a house you are entitled the the square land and the facilities on it, NOT the streets around it. My tax dollars pay for those roads like any other. But inessence the neighborhood now owns the road. West Hollywood does this, Melrose does this and now Silverlake, all because of bitchy ass homeowners with this false sense of entitlement. All it does is drive consumers and patrons away, so they can get their quiet ass neighborhood. Nevermind these people live within 2 miles of downtown #2 largest city in America. if they want peace and parking, they should go to the fucking suburbs.
    (end rant)

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 02:42 pm:

    I like the way mine looks. I think SUV's provide the utility of a minivan, but not the looks. I need a car that can haul the family around, but I want something that does not look like this

By semillama on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:37 pm:

    C'mon! It'll be a classic in what, five years? What's the age limit for that, anyway?

    Anyone been peering at the autoshow coverage?

    Some funky shit there.

    What you need, trace, is that new ford 49.

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:52 pm:

    25 years, i think

By Nate on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:57 pm:

    i dig that vw minivan prototype.

By Trace on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:58 pm:

    I have not seen those.

By Cat on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 04:27 pm:

    Trace has not seen the VW minivan prototype in case anyone was wondering.

By Antigone on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 04:51 pm:

    Really? Where did you hear that?

By on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 05:42 pm:

    OHMYGOD! HOLYSHIT! I was just wondering about that yesterday! Thanks Cat!

By on Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:27 pm:

    I wonder if Trace has taken a shit today.
    I hope he's remembering to breathe.

By Hal on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 01:47 am:

    If you want a TRUE SUV, then get yourself a fucking Hummer.

    Otherwise, get an economy car or a minivan like every other fucking person on the road.

By Trace on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 07:45 am:

    Hal, you are full of shit.
    And who the hell is ... ?
    What the fuck are you all talking about, remembering to breath and shit, what the hell?

By Trace on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:11 am:

By J on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:38 am:

    Do you know how hard it is to have sex in a vw?My husband had one when we first met.

By Trace on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:41 am:

By Ringo on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 12:02 pm:

    I had sex with my first wife in a VW and it was ok until the dike cop showed up.

By agatha on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 12:33 pm:

    the cop was containing a large volume of water? wow, that's impressive.

By Nate on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 12:51 pm:

    i had a lot of sex in a 1985 blue VW vanagon.

    i also used to race people on hwy 1 between bodega bay and jenner.

By semillama on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 12:58 pm:

    hummers are overrated. One of my volunteers this summer was in the Gulf War, and he told me that the vehicle of choice was the stripped-down Ford Broncos (or were they Chevy blazers? one of the two). The hummers got their motors clogged with sand and they had to ship in all the parts for anything on them from out of country, whereas the Fords/chevies were a common vehicle in country, so parts were readily available. I guess they performed better in the sand, too.

    On the other hand, humvees are damn versatile. There are so many variations on the basic theme.

By Dr. Spectrum on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 01:08 pm:

    i think hummers are overrated too.

    the vibration thing just doesn't produce the results its hyped up to be. Perhaps a nice vibrating device, alternating with the mouth play could produce more proof positive results for the famed hummer.

By semillama on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 03:26 pm:

    I thikn it's going to take a bioengineered organism to supply the perfect hummer.

By Trace on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 03:54 pm:

By Nate on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 05:26 pm:

    what is that? 1994 C220?

By heather on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 07:56 pm:

    i love my car

    it's cheap, old, beautiful, runs perfectly

    and it found me

    [not the car sarah mentioned btw, that one belongs to my grandmother and it scares me a little]

By Hal on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:29 pm:

    I was being a smartass people... Jesus.

    I drive a 1969 VW Bug, black with all original parts except the stero. Hey, gotta have some good music right?

    I've had sex in it a couple times, it can be tricky but its not that hard if you do it right.
    And hell the girl I had sex with was a 6'4" redhead, so it wasn't an economy car built for someone her size.

By Cat on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:41 pm:

    I was being a smartass too.

    I'm heartily sorry. I won't do it ever ever again, until tomorrow.

    I still have a mini minor in my garage because when I got rich enough to get a grown up car, I couldn't let my pretty mini go. If I'd bonked on her hood under the light of the Southern Cross in the Blue Mountains, I wouldn't tell anyway. I'm not that kind of girl.

    This not being a smartass sucks. It's really really hard not being able to ask Hal if he was sure it was a girl he was fucking and not an airbag.

By dave. on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 08:46 pm:

    i drive a very small car and i'm one of those guys that will do almost anything to keep the big minivans and suvs and gigantic trucks with canopies and their goddam motherfucking tinted windows from getting in front of me and completely, entirely blocking my view of the road ahead. i'll tailgate the fuck out of the guy in front of me in his civic or corolla or whatever other reasonable commuter vehicle (sorry, dude. nothing personal) if that's what it takes to keep that lane-surfing suv sonofabitch from getting in front of me. especially when the closest car behind me is 5 or 6 car lengths back. i've laid on the horn for 3 miles behind one such asshole, hawked up loogies on several others.

By Nate on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 09:35 pm:

    i don't understand that i can't see crap. you're so much safer behind a big ass fucking truck than in front of one.

    inertia. you can stop quicker.

By dave. on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 09:46 pm:

    ahhh, but i'm depending on that person's reflexes since i can't see any brake lights but his/hers. even if i back off significantly and if i do thet, it just opens it up for another person to swoop in and then i'm back at square one. it's not so much the size, it's the size and the fucking ubiquitous tinted windows.

    i think you're talking about momentum.

By Hal on Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 10:44 pm:

    Momentum and Inertia... Technically its both of them.

By Daniel ssss on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 12:24 am:

    did someone say cheap, old, runs perfectly? must be looking for me.

By dave. on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 02:14 am:

    similar, but not. practically, inertia = the tendency of a body at rest to remain at rest or of a body in motion to stay in motion in a straight line unless acted on by an outside force. momentum = A measure of the motion of a body equal to the product of its mass and velocity.

By Trace on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 07:08 am:

    '94 C280, 58k miles

By Trace on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 07:12 am:

By semillama on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 08:57 am:

    I have a corolla. nice little car. hope you never have to ride in the back though, they are notorious for no leg room there. Otherwise, I'm satisfied with mine.

By agatha on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 11:40 am:

    much better choice. i also like the new volkswagon jetta's.

    i'm proud of you, trace.

By semillama on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 12:22 pm:

    My brotheris getting a corolla to replace his mazda. ACtually, my mom is buying it for him, citing a better safety record. He's going to have a nicer corolla than mine, that bastard.

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 12:50 pm:

    i was actually talking about the amount of force necessary to stop you being considerably less than that required to stop an 18 wheeler. ergo, the highway snowplow effect an 18 wheeler has on impending doom.

    trace, there must be something wrong with that mercedes. it should be at least $22K.

    i drive a 2000 ford ranger.

By Trace on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 12:58 pm:

    Nate, check out the Blue Book

    I like the Corolla much better.

By Trace on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 01:04 pm:

    Since that link did not work, here it is:
    1994 Mercedes-Benz C-Class C280 Sedan 4D
    Engine: 6-Cyl. 2.8 Liter
    Trans: Automatic
    Drive: Rear Wheel Drive
    Mileage: 58,000
    Air Conditioning
    Power Steering
    Power Windows
    Power Door Locks
    Cruise Control
    AM/FM Stereo
    Premium Sound
    Dual Air Bags
    ABS (4-Wheel)
    Dual Power Seats
    Sliding Sun Roof
    Alloy Wheels
    Retail Value $19,845
    According to Kelley Blue Book, anyway.
    NADA Says:
    Body Style: Sedan 4 Door C280
    Model Number: HA28
    Weight: 3,293
    Acceptable Mileage Range: 80,001 - 90,000
    Average Trade-In: $14,300
    Average Retail: $16,975
    That's what they say anyway

By patrick on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 02:06 pm:

    like is said...."U-Drive-fast Motors" ....screwdriver sideways et al...

    anyway..WAY TO GO far as the legroom....maybe a civic or jetta would serve you better....i can vouch for the durability of Hondas and VW has always made a decent car...but Toyotas are alright too.

    if i had a little one to tote look at the Jettas or 4 door civics...but while im 1/2 of a jet settin 20 something couple...the 2 door coupe is super.

    yeah dave i hear the same way...i don't trust anyone else on the road....I always stay clear of large vehicles when on the highway...and id rather have one rear end me, as one who rear ends another is almost always at fault.

    on the streets in my neighborhood, some of them being quite tight, i love making soccer moms and small-dicked egoist gangsters shit their shorts....the streets are narrow but they have a clear partition down the middle from the concrete slabs. I always stay on my when i am approaching an SUV coming the other way, naturally they freak because it appears we can't pass at the same time, with parked cars on both sides...but some get ballsy, and try anyway, other bail out and pull in between parked cars. Im begging one day to be side scrapped by these pricks just so i can get out of the car, point out that Im on my side of the road and that they can suck shit for driving such a big assed cars....and of course skyrocket their already healthy insurance rates.

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 02:24 pm:

    This is what I got from KBB. Maybe it is the difference between california and kentuckouri, or wherever you live.

    1994 Mercedes-Benz C-Class C280 Sedan 4D

    Engine: 6-Cyl. 2.8 Liter
    Trans: Automatic
    Drive: Rear Wheel Drive
    Mileage: 58,000

    Air Conditioning
    Power Steering
    Power Windows
    Power Door Locks
    Cruise Control
    AM/FM Stereo
    Premium Sound
    Dual Air Bags
    ABS (4-Wheel)
    Dual Power Seats
    Sliding Sun Roof
    Alloy Wheels

    Retail Value $22,270

By patrick on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 03:28 pm:

    the lights have been turned out on our boy nate...

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 03:59 pm:

    what are you talking about patty?

    is that LA metro-power smugness, or something else?

By patrick on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 04:08 pm:

    oh, i dunno man, i just read they shut power off again up there chief...have they notified you that they are shutting you down this afternoon? does that mean you get to go home early and suck on the bong (thank god those things don't need electricity)?

By J on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 04:08 pm:

    It's going to get alot worse,not just in California but eveywhere.Where I live people in Tempe and Gilbert bought homes by power plants,the plants were there first,it didn't stop then from buying the houses,now with so many people moving here with their computers,cell phones the power company needs to expand the plants to generate more electricity,but now it's all not in my backyard.Fuck them I say,when I moved to my town it was pretty much farms,now it's all built up and people bought houses by this dairy farm,now they want the dairy farm removed,fuck them too.They have noses,they didn't notice the smell when they bought their houses.

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 04:43 pm:

    yeah, they've had the warnings out. I haven't lost power at work yet. Actually, I haven't been anywhere where the power has gone off.

    Both A. and my Mom were hit. A. yesterday, my Mom today.

    Now we're in a state of emergency, so funds can be diverted so that the state government can start dealing in engergy itself.

    Out of state natural gas suppliers (we have very few in state) have begun 86'ing PG&E, which is now down to junk status. Apparently PG&E has a billion dollar bill due in Feb., with about 500 million to pay it with.

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 04:48 pm:

    and I'm with J. Fuck the goddamn NIMBYs. We lost the chance to build a powerplant here in the valley recently. It passed federal muster, it passed state muster, it passed county muster. Then the city council decided that it didn't want a powerplant there.

    And then the HIPPIES. Unh unh, we should have gone to solar power years ago. (photovoltaic cells cost about $0.30 per kWh, or 600% of the rate californians are crying about now.) Unh unh, nuclear power is evil. unh unh, pass the bubbler and try not to piss on your fucking birks when you're out in the woods kissing your treefriends.

By patrick on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 05:43 pm:

    there are other means of producing power other than panels for private and residential use, say for heating water or other household appliances DOES make sense and the money saved DOES make up for the cost of the technology.

    hey nate, if you have 5 minutes give this a read

    id like to know what you think...

By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 06:28 pm:

    solar panels are not cost effective. at best, if you buy solar panels their cost will average out to abnout $0.30 per kwh. my last bill i paid $0.05 per kwh.

    if they were effective, they'd be on every roof in california.

    as for the article, i agree with some of it. geothermal heat pumps are neat. GHP is nearly 50% more effcient than a gas furnace.

    what wasn't mentioned, though, was nuclear power.

    which irks me.

By patrick on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 06:46 pm:

    nuclear power freaks people out. the potential for disaster, regardless of how limited it is is enough to scare people from it. Toxic waste is another issue to deal with when it comes to nuclear power....

    "if they were effective, they'd be on every roof in california."

    electric cars are effective yet know one drives them.

    i don't buy that. i do believe the large fossile fuel companies do keep certain products from hitting the shelves, and I do believe lobbiest for large companies, say like GE who I believe keep lawmakers from implementing smart plans..such as GHP....or the light panels they mention in the article. Imagine if every public bldg built from here on out utilized such tehcnology. Imagine if cities passed codes that demanded houses built after a certain date used such technology...

    granted to truly be effective, certain measures need to happen now...but one of the biggest truths in her article is that no one is talking about long term sensible solutions, but rather short term bailouts for the "bankrupt" energy co.

By dave. on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 07:30 pm:

    what i want to know is who the hell is pocketing all the fucking money from these rate hikes? are the increases putting any more water in the reservoirs? did the power-producing apparatus suddenly become more expensive to operate? who is the fucking capitalist that's taking my cash!?

By dave. on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 09:30 pm:

    DON'T YOU CARE???!!!


By Nate on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 10:36 pm:

    toxic waste is something we deal with in most all energy generation. the majority of california energy is generated by burning natural gas. that has an immediate toxic effect.

    the toxic waste arguement is flawed. all energy generation has a negative byproduct. Nuclear energy generation just happens to have one that is easy to contain and store.

    solar panels are readily available. you see them here and there. if they were cost effective, they would be everywhere. the truth is, you have to be a hippie with some money to be able to help the environment in that way.

    electric cars... don't get me started. the petroleum industry has a strong hold on america. Tesla devised a highly efficient steam engine that we could all be using right now. Cheaply, with less energy.

    detroit could be putting out cars that get 100 mpg.

    but no.



    dave, it is the generators.

    and the natural gas providers.

By Antigone on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 11:32 pm:

By Antigone on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 11:34 pm:

    OK, so more can be said. :-)

    From the page:

    Because power is generated through an
    electro-chemical rather than a combustion
    (burning) process, fuel cells also are
    environmentally sound. With electrical
    efficiencies of about 40%, PEM fuel cell systems
    conserve more fossil fuels than traditional power
    generation sources. Additionally, the heat
    produced by the fuel cell system can be recaptured
    and utilized in water or space heating
    applications in the home, increasing the
    efficiency to near 80%. Fuel cells produce no NOx
    or SOx, and emit only one-half of the carbon
    dioxide given off in traditional generation.

By Antigone on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 11:35 pm:


    You read it right.

    80% efficiency.

By dave. on Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 11:39 pm:

    right. exactly. some of this state's congressmen are investigating the possibility that this whole damn thing was planned to increase revenues. there are apparently several power plants in california that are suspiciously down for repairs.


By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 02:11 am:

    powerplants have to come down for maintenance at some point. they'd have to be somewhat organized to rotate the maintenance so as to best affect the market. i have trouble seeing an individual power plant operator losing out on a day's profit. especially when profit margins are so high.

By Patrick Farmer on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 10:11 am:

    heay wats up im pret new at this but you will haft to ber with me wat was yols names im interested in talking to you mabe have sombody to talk to or have a real womans advice on things its just that it gets prety boring over seas untill wee go on tore on jan.02

By Patrick Farmer on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 10:14 am:

    heay wats up im pret new at this but you will haft to ber with me wat was yols names im interested in talking to you mabe have sombody to talk to or have a real womans advice on things its just that it gets prety boring over seas untill wee go on tore on jan.02

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 01:09 pm:

    eat a dick

    exactly nate, plants DO have to shut down....and my point exactly is that since the plants are now privatized, many won't reopen because they aren't considered profitable by the FOR-profit corporations. If they were state run not-for profit plants...the profit issue wouldn't be so much of a concern.

    "i have trouble seeing an individual power plant operator losing out on a day's profit. especially when profit margins are so high."

    is it just me or am i reading this right? You mean you empathize when a private plants looses money? moreover a LOT of money?

    gas, water, electricity, these are not items that should be on the open market for a capitialist society. These effect everyone, they can determin ewhether a society will survive.

    these should be state regulated monopolies, and not-for-profit institutions....i wouldnt not be surprised AT ALL if there was some accuracy in Dave's theory that the evil corpo execs have facilitated this whole damn thing for profit.

    What are the negative by products from fuel cells or GHP or solar power?

    Im not sure toxic waste is easy to store and contain. That shit doesnt go away for hundreds of years and the sheer potential for catastrophe makes any sensible argument about toxic waste nearly null and void. Furthermore, we have been shown time and time again, corporations and the government cannot be manage waste properly. So putting all your marbles in nuclear energye, hell ANYTHING nuclear for that matter, be it weapons or submarines...the potential for global disaster is too risky. Don't talk to me about efficiency with such a gamble.

By J on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 01:26 pm:

    Theres going to be a fuel shortage too

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 01:37 pm:

    i'm not sure about fuel cells or GHP. the negatives with photovoltaic cells are the cost of manufacture. (environmental cost.)

    "is it just me or am i reading this right? You mean you empathize when a private plants looses money? moreover a LOT of money? "

    not at all. i don't see a private individual shutting down his own plant and losing a day's income. if there is a run on pokemon cards and only you and one other guy in town sell them, you're not going to close your store for a day so that your competition can enjoy artificially inflated pricing.

    you have a lot of media-induced fear of nuclear meltdown. you could have a meltdown every 20 years and still damage the overall environment less than the current industry is damaging the environment today.

    both france and japan are successful utilizers of nuclear energy. we're going to left behind.

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 01:49 pm:

    Check out this page. (Click on the "How does a fuel cell work" link.) The site is a bit out of date, but has lots of great info nonetheless.

    Basically, a fuel cell combines hydrogen and oxygen, making water (the main chemical byproduct) and captures electricity released in the process. The cool thing is that the source of hydrogen can be common hydrocarbons already used: natural gas, alcohol, and even gasoline. Of course, the best source is pure hydrogen, but there isn't a good infrastructure present now for distributing it.

    It's the best compromise out there for producing electricity. It uses the petro industry's products, but in a far more efficient way. They're environmentally friendly. (If run with pure hydrogen, the only emission is WATER.) It's basically a win for just about everybody, and that's why their adoption is inevitable, I think.

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 02:05 pm:

    i think the fossil enegery industries would either a) get on the bandwagon to make some bucks or b) try and keep that from hitting the mainstream in order to sell fossile fuels.

    i haev heard reports that the major petroleum co. are starting to research and invest in alternative fuel sources..realizing (FINALLY!! HELLO!?!?!) that oil won't last forever and its getting more and more difficult to tap oil reserves due to environmental concerns.

    Did you see the bit on Niteline last night about the US Intelligencia and how water and the lack their of in Northern Africa and the Mid east could be our next disaster. The lack of it and the fight to control the Tigris, Euphrates and the Nile rivers could be the next trigger for regional war, in which the US gets involved...being friends of Egypt, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

    Pretty fascinating

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 03:11 pm:

    I have to agree with Nate about nuclear energy. (Disclaimer: my grandfather was a nuclear chemist, so maybe I'm a bit biased...)

    The waste from nuclear reactors isn't as dangerous as we've been led to believe by the environmental movement. See this page. And my grandfather told me that the average coal based power plant releases as much environmental radiaion each year as the worst accident at Three Mile Island.

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 03:25 pm:

    i don't doubt what a coal mine might release into the air as well, or any other fossil fuel...i'm just saying....nuclear energy maybe efficient..and the waste may not be as dangerous as they say (im not sure i buy that, basic chemistry class can tell you how dangerous uranium and the other chemicals in the waste are to humans and the environment)

    nonetheless..i don't think nuclear energy is the ideal long term be all end all solution to the energy problem.....regardless, ther eis still potential for catastrophe with nuclear energy. Cherynobl can happen anywhere...tell them "its not as bad as the media says"

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 03:51 pm:

    The waste from a nuclear power plant is easily contained. From cumbustable sources it's belched into the atmosphere. And Cherynobl is a red herring. And don't you think that American, French, or Japanese standards for nuclear reactors are a bit higher than Russian standards? I mean, if a hydroelectric dam burst in China would you call for all American damn to be torn down, or for the world to discontinue the use of hydroelectric power?

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 04:18 pm:

    That's a good point, Antigone- One key dam failure in Idaho and a chain reaction of dam failures could kill a hell of a lot more than if a nuclear reactor melted down. Bye bye Portland.

    Cherynobl couldn't happen anywhere. The Cherynobl meltdown would not have occurred at any modern US nuclear powerplant. Three Mile Island, either. Modern US (and, I assume, French and Japanese) nuclear powerplants have double containment. If Chreynobl had the same, the disaster would have never happened.

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 05:03 pm:

    National standards around the world are not the issue.

    oh and my step-grandpa was a nuclear engineer as well in Oakridge Tennessee, he retired recently, but worked from the Manhatten project since.

    Calling Cherynobl a red herring is utterly the impact of that catastrophe can be felt as far away as Siberia. Fallout from Nevada can effect the east coast.....its utterly irresponsible to deny the potential impact one countries energy production can have on the world.

    A meltdown on the otherside of the world can't have an effect on the entire planet.

    Im sorry but as long as a nuclear energy exists there is a potential.

    Russia has a lost a handful of nuclear subs, never to be retrieved....our own gov't has lost several warheads during training here in our backyard...

    And of course a dam bust could cause a catastrophe which is why I argue we should try and move away from these ninteenth century relics of enegry production. We are already seeing dams become less effective due to low ice packs.

    Do you guys like playin bones? dominoes?

    i swear we should, as old men, get together around the card table, and harp on these same issues over some southern comfort until we fall over piss drunk....thats how i want to get old

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 05:36 pm:

    Your step grandpa may know my grandpa. My grandfather started at Oak Ridge around 1948 and retired in 1976. Ask your step grandpa if he knew Charles Barton.

    Anyway, the problem I see with many environmentalists, when it comes to the nuclear issue, is that they make claims from a completely uneducated standpoint and usually won't listen at all when their view is contradicted by facts. (Not talking about you in particular, partick. :-) ) And the trend seems to be for them to object to just about any power generation method except for the unfeasable ones, like wind and solar power.

    Personally, I'm really excited about the fuel cell. The benefits are enormous. With a fuel cell centric power generation system we could ditch the idea of centralized power plants alltogether. Every business and home could have it's own generator, or generators could be spread evenly through an urban area. Excess power could be diverted to the grid, or better yet, not generated at all. This system would be highly fault tolerant and efficient.

By Phil Cell on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 05:46 pm:

    YAY ME!!

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 05:50 pm:

    the fossil fuel co. don't the fuel cell. it would virtually mean consumer independence. they would become extinct...or they could become wise and be competitors in the fuel cell market.

    its kinda like the car & petroleum industry should my matter, anti matter "beam me up" device become a success.

    so what about dominos?

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:07 pm:

    Fuel cells run on fossil fuels, they just use them more efficiently. Read the FAQ, dude!

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:23 pm:

    Fossil fuels are fuels such as gas, coal and oil, which are produced from ancient plant material.

    Cambridge Online Dictionary

    now sure, hydrogen is a natural resource....but i think you know what i am referring to when i say fossil fuel

    stegmasaurus bonz baby!

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:24 pm:

    From the FAQ: "Fuel cells can also utilize fuel containing hydrogen, including methanol, ethanol, natural gas, and even gasoline or diesel fuel."

    Just one click away, waffle brain! :-P

By semillama on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:45 pm:

    How about that new solar cube thingy? Isn't it supposed to bring teh cost of solar cells down to a level where it can almost compete with fossil fuels? Supposedly, with more development, it will be cheaper too.

    I still am wondering why health clubs don't have some way to harnass all the energy expended on their cardio machines and store it as electricity...

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:50 pm:

    I still am wondering why it's illegal to have sex with your pet monkey.

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 06:53 pm:

    woah, no shit. i saw the solar cube at the Discover Science Center in Santa Ana in novemeber. i was driving by. i thought "hey look, that building is falling over."

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:04 pm:

    i read that antigone....i really did....the advantageous point about fuel cells is they can use hydrogen and oxygen....naturally occuring abundant resources that require no mining or destruction to harness.

By dave. on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:14 pm:

    fuck, patrick. i was gonna get on here and say exactly that.

    electricity and water (and possibly even fossil fuels) should never be free market commodities. ever. i'm not saying they should be free, just that they shouldn't be included in the supply and demand price leveraging. it infuriates me that some small group of people are getting fat off of this.

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:17 pm:

    That's exactly why fuel cells are so cool. They can use existing fuels until we have the infrastructure set up to deliver the new ones...

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:36 pm:

    so lets get some dominos....some liquor and talk some shit

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 07:37 pm:

    what about food, dave? what about housing? maybe it should all be government provided, eh?

    you want to spearhead the US cultural revolution?

By patrick on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 08:05 pm:

    ah jesus

    you know dave, this is just nate's way of expressing his desires know...assplay.

    maybe you could jet get agatha to consent and get it over with....

By Nate on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 08:12 pm:


By Cat on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 08:38 pm:

    I knew you boys couldn't just talk seriously about nuclear power and power rangers energy cells forever. Sooner or later it all comes down to ass. - chicken soup for the ass.

By Antigone on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 08:56 pm:

    I leave for a couple lousy hours, and this is what

    And, yet, now I realize that methane is an
    excellent power source...


By dave. on Friday, January 19, 2001 - 10:54 pm:

    nate, really. the way it is now, we're all dependent on this shit and when it get's scarce, only the rich will be able to afford it until all the supplies are entirely depleted. then, some other option will have to developed. i think, since it's inevitable the supplies will be depleted and alternatives will need to be developed, we could just skip the step of jacking the prices and making millions of people miserable. that's what makes capitalism evil. fuck it.

By Czarina on Saturday, January 20, 2001 - 08:13 pm:

By patrick on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 01:07 pm:

    i was having a discussion with angry sam.....

    i posed your question nate " do we have a right to electricity?"

    YES! we do.

    in a capitolist, democratic society, the gov't has an obligation to provide the basics, such as food water air and opportunity. we cannot be a part of their machine if we have don't have the basics.

    also your whine about the hippies......

    in general, we need the hippies to counter balance the religious yahoos on the other end. and then there are the rest of us in the middle...who actually think.

    whats next, they want to deregulate the water industry?

    and i want to reiterate...nuclear has been proven time and time again, corporations and gov'ts can't handle the responsibility that comes with it.

    these blackouts are bullshit, and the corpoate ceo pigs who are forcing the grid down should be hung by their balls.

By J on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 01:23 pm:

    A capitolist,democratic society...thats funny.

By Nate on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 01:53 pm:

    i think that the only thing that has been proven about nuclear engergy is that hippie scare tactics work.

    i appreciate angry sam's ability to think, however i think a discussion with him would be better served face to face, over a couple bottles of bourbon.

By J on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 02:13 pm:

    If our goverment provided us with electricity,it would just mean you'd pay higher taxes.

By patrick on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 02:41 pm:

    j i never said they should give it to us.

    thats exactly what we were doing nate...finding out my gallery show, (HIS gallery show as well) was bombed 5 days before, i called in sick, packed my back pack walked a mile to sams house with a 5th of Jim Beam and two liter. I was passed out by 4 on his couch.

By Nate on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 02:52 pm:

    bombed? what? explain.

By patrick on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 02:57 pm:

    my gallery show was nixed due to a fuck head bitch who called us sunday night to say the location was a no go....after $500 dollars in postcards and postage.....and countless hours of verbal releases et al

    its a kick in the nuts for 7 artists, a band and a dj....the show was this sturday, we had press in local rags, people coming in from out of town.....trying to put a publcity machine in reverse...being told that 6 months of work (not in vain mind you) will not be able to be shwon 5 days prior....its all a kick in the nuts...

    J i got a phone number for you if you want.

By Nate on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:11 pm:

    that fucking sucks patrick. i'm sorry to hear that.

By Antigone on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:19 pm:

    Why does it suck, Nate? If the show was meant to go forward the people would have supported it, right? :-P

By patrick on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 03:36 pm:

    my local college radio...they have program between 12-1 called the punk rock lunch hour. I LOVE IT when the dj's put a record on, and its on the wrong now the girl must have jerks on 45 rpm is god damn hilarious.

    yeah thanks nate...everyone is extremely depressed about it. angry same recently had his screenplay rejected by some asshole germans who had been leading him on for 5 months with 1 million had been casted, Adam Goldberg (the jewish cuy in Private Ryan) and Julie Delpy (the cutie in Killing Zoe).....hads signed letters of intent. One of the producers (she also produced American History X) was about to set the production schedule, after countless rewrites..they pulled out....angrysam said "well at least i have the gallery show" and now this......

    im worried about him. He's been gettign kicked in the nuts by hollywood for way too long. And everything always comes back to money. Had we paid and secured a gallery space as opposed to relying on a verbal contract....we wouldnt be screwed right now.

By Nate on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 04:22 pm:

    it probably doesn't matter to you, but in the state of california a verbal contract holds water.

    ahhh, fuck off antigone.

By patrick on Tuesday, January 23, 2001 - 05:39 pm:

    yeah i know...we considered small claims court. there are 7 artists involved in this....monies for postage and postcards would tally up to a little less than $600/ which is around $70 beans per artist.We decided to drop the negative, move on to the postitive (finding another space). the emotional distress caused by the battle would not be worth it.....since nico was the producer for this, she would be the plantif for all of us and she's in the process of launching her own company, so she doesnt need anymore stress.

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS . torturechamber . . receipts . contact