His jet fuel is pure hot air, so no problem really.

Link Brentwood CA (new window)

Brentwood CA is only 74 miles from Sac, I don't think Schwarzenegger lives there. I believe he lives in LA.


/People who live in the city of Brentwood NoCal get pissed off at the neighborhood in LA called Brentwood.

Governor Schwarzenegger commutes by private jet between LA and Sacramento every day so he can get on with the business of reducing greenhouse gases

The solution to most of the "greenhouse" problem in two words, "Nuclear Power".

A combination of breeder reactors and pebble bed reactors combined with reprocessing the fuel (Screw you Jimmy Carter) should do the trick nicely. Any radioactive waste left over will have rather short half lives, requiring only a few hundred years of containment. Yucca mountain could easily handle this.

There is no technological reason why this could not be done. There are plenty of POLITICAL reason though that block this clean form of energy from being further developed.

The Soviet built BN-600 (new window) reactor has been in operation since 1980 and has an excellent safety record. The BN-800 reactor should be operational by 2012. The US would be wise to observe these developments and use the lessons learned from these reactors to design our own version. Perhaps we could simply buy the plans from the Russians.

These reactors would not only provide electricity, but they could provide massive amounts of fresh water to the increasingly parched Southwest US through desalination like the earlier BN-350 reactor did. (The BN-350 could produce about 97 acre feet of water a day.)

/Off my soapbox.

Gray Davis did something similar without the excuse of having any kids.

Meh, "carbon footprint" the White Guilt phrase of the oughties.

Crosshair: Why would we substitute one problematic, non-renewable resource with another problematic non-renewable resource? Between Craig Venter, nanosolar technology, and our vast untapped wind power opportunities, just to name a few options, we are literally drowning in better solutions if the federal government would mearly half-ass trying to get us a new energy policy.

Why would he take a jet when he could GET TO THE CHOPPAH!!!

Hey - He gave us Terminator 1, Terminator 2, and because of that we got Sarah Connor Chronicles.

The man can do NO WRONG.

Whatsleft: Crosshair: Why would we substitute one problematic, non-renewable resource with another problematic non-renewable resource? Between Craig Venter, nanosolar technology, and our vast untapped wind power opportunities, just to name a few options, we are literally drowning in better solutions if the federal government would mearly half-ass trying to get us a new energy policy.

Here's an idea... we use each resource until it become prohibitively expensive, at which point something else becomes the "cheap" source.

On a side note, this is Arnold "Hummer H1" Schwartzenegger, right? He's filthy rich. Should we really expect otherwise?

Crosshair: The Soviet built BN-600 (new window) reactor has been in operation since 1980 and has an excellent safety record. The BN-800 reactor should be operational by 2012.

Actually, as far as I recall, BN-600 had a few accidents (assuming we know about all). The Japanese experimental breeder reactor had a leak as well, and it was shut down because of that.

BN-800 is still on paper, despite the plans to build it a long time ago. Neither Rosatom, nor the Japanese (who paid over a billion bucks for the BN-600 plans) have built one. I've heard it is because BN-xx needs expensive exotic materials for their construction. If I remember correctly, the cost of BN-type is over four times that of an equivalent WWER reactor.

Reactors of that type seem much more efficient than slow-neturon reactors, and can burn U238, but produce fissile material by design. This means the technology is politically 'sensitive', even in a peaceful nuclear program.

And, finally, Rosatom hasn't built a single commercial BN, but they have built (and sold) quite a few WWERs during the same time.

Why would anyone in their right mind visit LA when they could, and have to, live in Sacto?

I have little problem with Arnold going back and forth, but really, Sacramento is a much nicer place to live. Trust me, I've been to both places extensively.

No right thinking person cares.

I_Approve_Of_This_Message: Why would he take a jet when he could GET TO THE CHOPPAH!!!

Thread over.

Izunbacol:Here's an idea... we use each resource until it become prohibitively expensive, at which point something else becomes the "cheap" source.


You're gunna have to elaborate what "prohibitively expensive" means. And besides that I'm pretty sure I disagree with whatever definition you give it. A free market system would develop a cheaper solution if it was possible regardless of whatever "prohibitive expense" the old energy paradigm develops. It's just a matter of time before both fossil fuels AND nuclear technology become obviated.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN THIS STORY but I saw a headline earlier today about trans-atlanitic flights with 4 passengers, pissing off environmentalists.

/so there
//fark you, buddy
///take a train

I've read articles about trans-atlantic flights with zero passengers, flown so such-and-such an airline can keep its spot on the schedule at Heathrow.

Considering how expensive fuel is these days, I don't think airlines fly around empty planes for fun.
And no passengers != empty plane, they can fill the plane with cargo (no idea if they do or not)

NexusSix: I've read articles about trans-atlantic flights with zero passengers, flown so such-and-such an airline can keep its spot on the schedule at Heathrow.

actually, airlines make more money via cargo and mail than they do with passengers

I_Approve_Of_This_Message: Why would he take a jet when he could GET TO THE CHOPPAH!!!

This post is full of win.

Well, not just cargo.

Let's say 500 people want to go to London from New York City, but only three people want to go to NYC from London.

What are the airlines supposed to do, let the planes pile up in London until they can fill them up? Abandon them there?

Typical republican .... says one thing, and does the exact opposite.

/now if he could just go gay ... then he'd be 100%, grade-a GOP!

but...but...they defend it in the Gore threads.

Weird dat.

baccc

Typical republican politican .... says one thing, and does the exact opposite.

FTFY

Can we just destroy the planet soon so all this hypocritical douchebaggery can be done with already?

pup.socket: Crosshair: The Soviet built BN-600 (new window) reactor has been in operation since 1980 and has an excellent safety record. The BN-800 reactor should be operational by 2012.

Actually, as far as I recall, BN-600 had a few accidents (assuming we know about all). The Japanese experimental breeder reactor had a leak as well, and it was shut down because of that.

BN-800 is still on paper, despite the plans to build it a long time ago. Neither Rosatom, nor the Japanese (who paid over a billion bucks for the BN-600 plans) have built one. I've heard it is because BN-xx needs expensive exotic materials for their construction. If I remember correctly, the cost of BN-type is over four times that of an equivalent WWER reactor.

Reactors of that type seem much more efficient than slow-neturon reactors, and can burn U238, but produce fissile material by design. This means the technology is politically 'sensitive', even in a peaceful nuclear program.

And, finally, Rosatom hasn't built a single commercial BN, but they have built (and sold) quite a few WWERs during the same time.

What about CANDU? Can they do?

bacccc: Typical republican US politician.... says one thing, and does the exact opposite.



FTFY

Necrosis: I_Approve_Of_This_Message: Why would he take a jet when he could GET TO THE CHOPPAH!!!

Thread over.

Without question...

Typical republican .... says one thing, and does the exact opposite.

/now if he could just go gay ... then he'd be 100%, grade-a GOP!

Typical hippie that blames everything on Republicans because he's broke.

Hey generalizing is fun!

/you honestly think Democrats don't use the same double-speak that Republicans do?

But...but...but...AAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLL GOOOOOOOOORRRRREEE!!!

Crosshair: Governor Schwarzenegger commutes by private jet between LA and Sacramento every day so he can get on with the business of reducing greenhouse gases

The solution to most of the "greenhouse" problem in two words, "Nuclear Power".

A combination of breeder reactors and pebble bed reactors combined with reprocessing the fuel (Screw you Jimmy Carter) should do the trick nicely. Any radioactive waste left over will have rather short half lives, requiring only a few hundred years of containment. Yucca mountain could easily handle this.

There is no technological reason why this could not be done. There are plenty of POLITICAL reason though that block this clean form of energy from being further developed.

The Soviet built BN-600 (new window) reactor has been in operation since 1980 and has an excellent safety record. The BN-800 reactor should be operational by 2012. The US would be wise to observe these developments and use the lessons learned from these reactors to design our own version. Perhaps we could simply buy the plans from the Russians.

These reactors would not only provide electricity, but they could provide massive amounts of fresh water to the increasingly parched Southwest US through desalination like the earlier BN-350 reactor did. (The BN-350 could produce about 97 acre feet of water a day.)

/Off my soapbox.


on a semi-related side-note, during the cold war the US gov put large amounts of time and money into building a nuclear powered bomber. GE even finished some prototype engines. but due to that whole "nuclear fallout" coming from the engines as it flew the project was killed.

GET TO DA CHOPPA!

I wonder how much air pollution he's caused between smoking those big brown dicks and all the explosions in his movies?

Global warming isn't science....it's political science.

bacccc: Typical republicanglobal warming loon .... says one thing, and does the exact opposite.

Satanic_Hamster: Well, not just cargo.

Let's say 500 people want to go to London from New York City, but only three people want to go to NYC from London.

What are the airlines supposed to do, let the planes pile up in London until they can fill them up? Abandon them there?

Drop rates until they fill up.

Al Gore uses his carbon spewing lifestyle to thwart the negligent role of federal responders at FEMA and DHS. Fark him!

Al Gore helped airlift some 270 Katrina evacuees on two private charters from New Orleans, acting at the urging of a doctor who saved the life of the former vice president's son ... About 140 people, many of them sick, landed in Knoxville on Sept. 3. The second flight, with 130 evacuees, landed the next day in Chattanooga. (new window)

MFL: "Global warming isn't science, it's political science." is the mantra the uneducated use to ignore a problem that will affect all people, and to blame China and India for taking their jobs...

FTFY.

The same liberals that did not allow us to have more nuclear power plants or build more refineries are yelling at us for being less green now?

Looks like the ALGores of the world need to look in the mirror and STFU

b>Nemo's Brother: The same liberals that did not allow us to have more nuclear power plants or build more refineries are yelling at us for being less green now? Looks like the ALGores of the world need to look in the mirror and STFU

So more nuclear plants and more refineries would have made us more green?

Whatsleft: Crosshair: Why would we substitute one problematic, non-renewable resource with another problematic non-renewable resource? Between Craig Venter, nanosolar technology, and our vast untapped wind power opportunities, just to name a few options, we are literally drowning in better solutions if the federal government would mearly half-ass trying to get us a new energy policy.

I;m glad you have so much faith in The Government. Tell me about all the other things they do so well.

NexusSix: I've read articles about trans-atlantic flights with zero passengers, flown so such-and-such an airline can keep its spot on the schedule at Heathrow.

I'm so worried about the baggage-retrieval system they've got at Heathrow.

cubsfan07: Can we just destroy the planet soon so all this hypocritical douchebaggery can be done with already?

Paging Mr. Sunshine!

/Try a double espresso with extra sugar, maybe...

phillydrifter: THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING IN THIS STORY but I saw a headline earlier today about trans-atlanitic flights with 4 passengers, pissing off environmentalists.

/so there
//fark you, buddy
///take a train

That story was stupid. There was a screw up of some sort (either mechanical or weather related, I forget) that left the plane mostly empty, but they needed to fly to London anyways because there was a full plane worth of people in London with tickets to New York that needed to fly using that plane. Occassionally, airlines fly planes completely empty to move the equipment around to a place with paying passengers waiting for them.

Sofa King Awesome: b>Nemo's Brother: The same liberals that did not allow us to have more nuclear power plants or build more refineries are yelling at us for being less green now? Looks like the ALGores of the world need to look in the mirror and STFU

So more nuclear plants and more refineries would have made us more green?

Nuke plants, yes. Refineries, no.

Nuke plants are very green. The emmit no pollution or greenhouse gases. People are just afraid of another Chernobyl-style incident, which is highly unlikely (basically impossible) in a modern, western nuke plant instead of a poorly designed Soviet model where the people running it intentionally shut off the few safety features it did have and then overloaded it as an "experiment". As for Three Mile Island-nobody died due to that incident. Compare that to your typical coal power plant, which probably kills hundreds or thousands of people during it's lifetime due to the pollution it puts out. It's just they die of lung aliments one at a time over a period of many years.

See, one person commuting is not 'bad'. Al Gore commuting around the world to stop global warming is not 'bad'. Why?

Because everywhere else in their lives (Such as his wind-powered home) and everyone else they talk to is stepped up to do their part.

It WAYYYYYY more than cancels out.

Are you suggesting he drive?

I think this is fine.

Geotpf: Nuke plants, yes. Refineries, no.

Nuke plants are very green. The emmit no pollution or greenhouse gases. People are just afraid of another Chernobyl-style incident ...

Having read long-term studies of the effects of the Chernobyl accident, I can say any pooh-poohing of its health and safety consequences is misinformed. The people who are illegally moving back to the area today also suffer a terrible number of radiation-derived illnesses.

But that's not even half the problem (or half-life the problem!). The larger concern is the deadly waste. Unspent 239PU in nuclear fuel rods has a half-life of 24,000 years. There are few credentialed geologists willing to make any claims of safety for such long-term storage. And there is no human organization capable of guaranteeing safety for that time period either.

That is why Greenpeace and other environmental groups have actually accepted highly scrubbed cleaner coal fire plants as the least damaging alternative for the time being. It will be interesting to hear what Obama and Clinton have to say on the subject in Wyoming (our best domestic source for cleaner burning coal).

And of course, W. had to kill a prototype super-clean burning coal-fire plant that was to be built and tested in Illinois...
US scraps futuristic coal plant (new window)

I love it when Republicans start eating their own.