 |
Environmental Capital – WSJ.com : Fuel for Debate: Pelosi Suggests Natural Gas Isn’t a Fossil Fuel — Can you imagine if Bush said something like this. Even he knows better.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi seemed to suggest in a television interview Sunday that natural gas isn’t a fossil fuel.
From the post on the Journal’s Washington Wire by Journal reporter John D. McKinnon:
On NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday, the speaker twice seemed to suggest that natural gas – an energy source she favors – is not a fossil fuel.
“I believe in natural gas as a clean, cheap alternative to fossil fuels,” she said at one point. Natural gas “is cheap, abundant and clean compared to fossil fuels,” she said at another.
Rep. Pelosi’s spokesman later said the speaker knows natural gas is a fossil fuel, but likes it because it burns more cleanly than coal and oil.
#28–Mustard==good one. Get caught in a contradiction or inconsistency or outright impossibility outside of magic, and you call in a “nuance.”
Hah, hah. Nuance====thats the ticket.
I got off on a rant there. I should clarify my statement that there is good reason to believe that natural gas IS a fossil fuel, although it appears abiotic in nature as well.
However, I think the term fossil fuel is most commonly used to describe crude oil. I think the jury is still out on that one.
#31 – Bobo
>>Get caught in a contradiction or inconsistency or
>>outright impossibility outside of magic, and you
>>call in a “nuance.”
Have you been drinking again, Bobo? Or is it those magic ‘shrooms? What’s the contradiction? What’s the inconsistency? What’s the outright impossiblity?
Or were you just cut ‘n’ pasting from some other reply?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/%22fossile+fuel%22
Main Entry:
fossil fuel
Function:
noun
Date:
1835
: a fuel (as coal, oil, or natural gas) formed in the earth from plant or animal remains
#32 – Mark T.
>>However, I think the term fossil fuel is most
>>commonly used to describe crude oil. I think the
>>jury is still out on that one.
Of course it is, and of course it is.
But we’re scraping the bottom of the barrel here in an effort to make the Dems seem like Bobos, and this technical deviation from dictionary protocol is good for a headline. Kind of pitiful, but true.
Just trying to get this back on topic a bit, as bobbo also seems to be doing. Can anyone point me at an actual report with the full quote in context or a youtube video of her saying this or something.
I think it’s entirely possible that Mr. Mustard had it right in post #7 when he essentially called it a minor flub or some such.
More importantly though, I searched for this and only see it on blogs. Even the link up top is blogs.wsj.com.
Would someone please post a link to a real source? I’d really like to hear or read it in context.
Thanks to anyone who finds it in a real journal rather than on a blog.
#36 – Scottie
If she did, in fact, say this on Meet The Press, I’m sure someone must have YouTube’d it. Context and all.
I was actually watching her for a while on that show, but unfortunately, I had to go out for brunch before this alleged “incident” occurred.
I think it is interesting that Pelosi thinks natural gas is not a fossil fuel and that crude oil is. There is a good chance that she is wrong on both counts.
In the end, you can’t prove either point without drilling a hole down through the Earth’s crust for research purposes. Actually, I would love to see Congress fund a scientific research drilling project through the Earth’s crust to the mantle and beyond. Wishful thinking.
Hey Mark, fossil fuels fall into three broad categories: coal, oil, and ng. What I’m surprised about is that she isn’t thinking about dual burning plants in the short term that use both coal and ng.
Burns hotter, cleaner, and is relatively cheap to convert an old coal fired plant. Gas supply is stable and well service in North America and can supply a large amount of needs until newer technologies come online.
#37 – Mr. Mustard,
That’s what I figured, but couldn’t find it when I googled or when I searched on youtube.
I am pretty sure that the term “fossil fuel” originated with coal mainly due to the fact that you can find fossilized animals in coal deposits. However, most coal deposits are within a few hundred feet of the surface, right where you would expect to find carbon from fossilized organic matter that grew on the surface millions of years ago. Only rarely do coal mines penetrate deeper than 1000 feet from the surface.
So, coal is most definitely a fossil fuel. However, that does not mean that crude oil and natural gas found several miles underground are also “fossil fuels”. I have never heard of any test that can prove that they came from fossilized anything. There is no organic matter at 10,000 feet down to decompose and turn into oil or gas.
Heck, Chevron is drilling to 30,000 deep to find oil in the Gulf of Mexico. Can this really be a “fossil fuel”? See the following link:
http://tinyurl.com/32dfev
QB, I still say that we need to start building lots of nuclear power plants if we ever want to stop using oil, gas, and coal. Gas is currently plentiful but it is difficult to transport. There will never be enough solar cells or windmills to power everyone’s homes, businesses, and vehicles. At least not without returning to 19th Century levels of energy usage.
Does she have natural gas confused with methane? Methane burns just as well as natural gas, and it can be harvested from sewage pools.
The fact that it isn’t being harvested on an industrial scale yet is borderline criminal, actually. . .
I have a feeling she doesn’t know the difference.
She came into town on her high horse. I’m going to pull the troops out. Then there was a vote to end funding for the troops and end the war. She voted for funding the troops and extending the war.
She is why Congress has an approval rate is 9%.
Then she was nowhere to be found when they voted for illegal wire tapes on Americans.
Shame on you Nancy.
Cripes, how does this throwaway get so many comments? Why does Musturd get so animated? (And yes, M-turd, as long as the C. Dvorak chide continues, that is your new moniker.)
QB..the Cloris L. one-liner was a gem!
Transcript Here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26377338/page/2/
I watched the show on tape and didn’t catch the error. In context, I understood her to say Nat Gas should be developed. There are many large NG fields discovered years ago that were simply capped off and entered into our carbon reserves as there was no ready market for it. Hard to believe a gas can be infused into rocks and such.
I’d put it into the category of “misspeaking” and btw if it was a big deal and relevant at all, the interviewer should have asked for clarification on point. But he understood what she was saying too.
Small points for small minds. Better to focus on what a total political game playing sleaze ball she is–not how she might misspeak from time to time.
Pelosi also just said that the Catholic Church believes life begins at 3 months. I think the Pope would disagree. Pelosi is an idiot.
Nancy Pelosi is personally invested in natural gas companies.
#28, Musturd
Perhaps the nuances of spirituality go beyond what seems to be your third-grade options of TRUE or FALSE. If you think all of Christianity hinges on God being some guy with white hair and a beard, sitting up in the clouds shooting lightning bolts and thunder at the infidels, I feel sorry for you
Feel all you wish. The point about if there is a god is a fact, not an opinion. The same as is the sun shining or is it raining. When you get to the point of how much the clouds obscure the sun is a matter of opinion, just as how much weight or interpretation may be put on the bible.
Until you can prove that here is a god to the same degree as I can prove the sun is shining then there is no disproving the non existence of a “god”.
#44 – John
>>And yes, M-turd, as long as the C. Dvorak
>>chide continues, that is your new moniker
Oh, OK. You win. I concede defeat to the greater power of the Prodigious Prognosticator of All Things Tech.
I won’t call you Mr. C. Dvorak any longer, so drop the “turd” stuff, huh? I take enough of a pounding from my other nemeses on this blog.
#48, Fusion
Have it your way. If you think every question about the mysteries of the universe can be answered as easily as “Is there a sun in the sky”, so be it.
I continue to feel sorry for you.
#50 – Mister Mustard,
I find it very strange that you should feel the need to feel sorry for anyone who does not believe in spirituality of any form. Has Mr. Fusion ever indicated unhappiness as a result? If he feels no lack, why on Earth would you do so on his behalf?
It’s very condescending and a waste of your effort that could be going toward feeling sorry for people with real problems or for innocent animals that have to deal with the problems thrust upon them by misevolved humans or just on feeling good about yourself.
Save your emotional energy for where and when it makes sense. Nothing is right for everyone, most certainly not your own minority belief system.
#45 – bobbo,
Thanks for the transcript. I read it as you did. I think she meant compared to other fossil fuels and just left out the “other”. A missed word sure can make a difference in meaning though. “One small step for man …” comes to mind. I think she flubbed a line. I doubt it indicates a lack of basic understanding of fossil fuels.
#41 – Mark T.
I think the term fossil fuel comes from the assumption that it is organic matter from decomposed plants and animals. Natural gas is typically lumped with that assumption even though there may well be inorganic sources of any or all of the fossil fuels.
I heard a geologist lecture on the subject stating that oil is an inorganic compound. He had predicted that oil could be found drilling at some location that would definitely not have been predicted as a site under the assumption of organic decomposition. He found some small but significant amount of oil there, where there should have been none.
Still though, referring to all of coal, natural gas, and oil as fossil fuels does still reflect current knowledge quite well.
#51 – Scottie
>>Nothing is right for everyone, most certainly
>>not your own minority belief system.
You’re right, Scottie. Nothing is right for everyone. I’m fine pleased to leave Fusion to his beliefs, as long as he leaves me to mine. When he (and the rest of youse) start up with the “misguided”, “sheeple”, “imbecile” stuff, then enough is enough.
btw, my “minority belief system”, generally categorized, encompasses the vast majority of earth’s population. Maybe there’s a reason for that.
#53 “btw, my “minority belief system”, generally categorized, encompasses the vast majority of earth’s population. Maybe there’s a reason for that.”
No, there is about 2% who fall outside that category. Some notable members of that 2% included Stalin, Mao and other like minded individuals… 😉
#54 – O’Furniture
>>Some notable members of that 2% included Stalin,
>>Mao and other like minded individuals…
Them’s fightin’ words on dvorak dot org slash blog. Just wait for the Crusaders of Atheism to track you down and have their evil way with you!
btw, you forgot Pol Pot. He was a very popular Atheist too.
#55 “btw, you forgot Pol Pot. He was a very popular Atheist too.”
So many monsters, so little time. 🙂
The adherents of atheism have murdered more people
in the last 100 years than any other group in history, given even 10X the amount of time…