Yeah, it should be doable. It's just not as efficient energy wise. It would be far more expensive per mile than electric. But we could do it.
Burning fossil fuels is bad. The medical, chemical, industrial, and other uses of petroleum are very good and important.
The following is a good explanation of why it is difficult to transition away from fossil fuels... https://www.brookings.edu/essay/why... that humanity's,climate of our entire planet.
Yeah, we have solutions for all of that. Hydrogen, biofuels, and nuclear solves all of that regarding burning fossil fuel. But what it really gets right is Our biggest challenges are political In other words, people (corporations) fighting what science proves can and needs to happen for their own selfish reasons.
So tell me...How are you going to get China to abandon fossil fuel? Or Russia? Also, what are you going to use to power aircraft?
We can't control China or Russia. I don't know why this is a talking point... If China and Russia want to use a more expensive and climate damaging energy source that's no reason for us to do it as well. And we certainly shouldn't set ourselves up to rely on them at all. Biofuels can power long range aircraft. Boeing is already committed to this. https://biofuels-news.com/news/boeing-set-to-fly-with-aircraft-using-sustainable-fuels/ https://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-biofuels-idUSKBN29R2C4
By developing alternative energies that are cheaper than fossil fuels. Electric-powered aircraft is being worked on. The hold up is battery technology which everyone, from corporations to universities are working on.
@Phatguysrule and @SlyPokerDog I don't see it. Especially considering the energy density of petroleum compared to other energy sources. I don't see how something else could possibly be cheaper? And we absolutely should be concerned with what China and Russia are doing with regards to sources of energy. We do not want them to have a competitive advantage.
Not to mention that the primary impetus for getting us off fossil fuels is to combat climate change. If China, India, and Russia are still burning fossil fuels what good does it do if we aren't?
When you consider the cost to the environment fossil fuels are already far more expensive than renewables. I didn't say to ignore those countries, I said we can't force them. Once we show its better they'll follow to keep up. But to keep chopping off our own nose just because China and Russia are as well is kind of stupid.
Again, they'll follow once we're getting cheap clean energy. Especially if we institute a carbon tax and dividend including goods and services. Then Chinese, Russian, and Indian products will be far more expensive than more responsible countries, and they'll lose the US market.
the only problem is Asia is fools gold. I’ll get stuck trying to take it, too many fronts and nobody wants you to get those extra troops for Asia. I like to get Australia for the extra troops and try and take South America lol
My family has an annual risk game every thanksgiving. There is a championship belt and everything, I shit you not. Australia is the place to be. Or if you can lock down all the Americas.
Certainly any new vehicles and equipment should be using alternative energy sources in 10 years. We're not going to be able to outlaw older vehicles, but yeah, if we get on it, there is no reason not. Though most older vehicles could be converted to run on hydrogen or biofuels...
Then we'll eliminate lithium from the equation or extract it from seawater, which can now be done economically. We have solutions to these problems. https://www.eurekalert.org/news-rel...rs have now developed,parts per million (ppm). https://www.science.org/content/art... an,selectively extract lithium from seawater.
