Ghostsof1915 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 I'm waiting for this. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strawbone Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 5 minutes ago, bh90 said: look.. i hear you. but take it from someone who's close to the battery sector and part of my job. The world is not ready for electrification. It's actually a good thing there's still resistance to it because if more people decided to wake up and demand EV's, it would fail. we simply lack the infrastructure to support electric vehicles, and if use of electric vehicles significantly increases too fast and the infrastructure is not there to support it, than there would be even more of a resistance to change. - Europe's infrastructure is too old and needs major updates. - North America is too vast and there's no viable solution for putting electrical tractor trailers in circulation for cross-province / cross-state transportation without increasing the time it takes to complete a delivery which would turn increase the price of transport which will increase the cost of goods. - Too many people park on streets where charging options lack if North America was serious about cutting down emissions they would be pushing the business sector to use the railway and would promote / incentivizing the building of commercial buildings near rail spurs. The western world also needs to give up some "convenience", We don't need to order something off amazon at 10 AM on a Sunday for it to deliver at 6 pm on a Sunday. Our need to want everything now and fast is what's contributing to a significant demand on the release of emissions in the environment. EV's are great in theory but, to be determined, if North America will be bale to implement an infrastructure soon enough to support it. I would advocate that we need to focus on life-choices and government policies that reduce over-consumption and waste. Aviation, Container Vessels, and Tractor Trailers is what pollutes the world and the demand for these modes of transportation continues to go up for the purpose of our "wants" and "convenience" Just my 2 cents. I would argue that we could also easily cut fuel consumption and emissions in half by simply using smaller lighter cars with zero new infrastructure or technology. It's ridiculous how many giant trucks and SUVs are on the road when 90% of the time a hatchback with a 1.5L engine getting 50mpg would suffice. There'd also be less wear and tear on roads, easier parking, less impact in collisions, lower up-front-costs, lower maintenance costs, etc etc. For the record, I drive a Miata 90% of the time so I'm walking the walk (or maybe driving the drive?) Also, GO CANUCKS GO! 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goalie Interference Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 hour ago, IBatch said: We have the masters permission to win a cup! Thank goodness. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 Big game, we're doing well again but lose our star goalie. Makar vs Hughes, Miller vs MacKinnon should shape up nicely. I think lost amongst all the stars, our defence will have to really shine. Got a feeling our depth guys will have a big game so expecting scoring from Lindholm and our bottom-6. 3-2 Canucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrammaInTheTub Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) It’s wild to think when I’m an even older gramma in the bathtub I’ll get to tell my grandkids about when I would drive my own car. Edited March 13 by GrammaInTheTub Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RomanPer Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 4 hours ago, HKSR said: With the way things are going, I'd slot Joshua on to Lindholm's wing and go from there. Minimal disruption of the chemistry built the last 4 games. Mikheyev-Miller-Boeser (Mik hasn't looked this good all year... could be a healing knee, or simply the Miller factor, but either way, he has looked his best on this line). Hoglander-Petey-Suter (Suter is an excellent utility forward. With him and Hogs hounding the puck, it has opened up some space for Petey). Joshua-Lindholm-Garland (pretty much an upgraded 3rd line. If this isn't clicking the same way it has been with Podz, then swap Joshua and Podz). Podkolzin-Blueger-Lafferty/PDG (Lafferty and PDG can be swapped in and out...) These lines looks very solid and extremely defensively sound. Likely the reason we're seeing such good defensive games the past 4 games. On defence, I'd just swap Cole, Myers, Juulsen, and Zadorov in and out of the lineup to keep everyone fresh. Hughes, Hronek, and Soucy should be the mainstays. There's also an option to put Podz with Petey and Hoglander and move Suter to the 4th line with Blueger and Lafferty/PDG. More muscle to Petey's line. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 45 minutes ago, Captkirk888 said: WTF! Typical eastern media. they didn't just want to put the guy from our team with C on his jersey ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strawbone Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 2 minutes ago, canucks curse said: they didn't just want to put the guy from our team with C on his jersey ??? Or at least a guy who's ACTUALLY ON OUR TEAM! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucks curse Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 45 minutes ago, Captkirk888 said: WTF! Typical eastern media. they didn't just want to put the guy from our team with C on his jersey ??? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrammaInTheTub Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 It’s all about the clicks and engagement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bh90 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 16 minutes ago, Strawbone said: I would argue that we could also easily cut fuel consumption and emissions in half by simply using smaller lighter cars with zero new infrastructure or technology. It's ridiculous how many giant trucks and SUVs are on the road when 90% of the time a hatchback with a 1.5L engine getting 50mpg would suffice. There'd also be less wear and tear on roads, easier parking, less impact in collisions, lower up-front-costs, lower maintenance costs, etc etc. For the record, I drive a Miata 90% of the time so I'm walking the walk (or maybe driving the drive?) Also, GO CANUCKS GO! i agree and maybe that falls under government policy. SUV's and Trucks still have their place and can be more efficient than a truck if it's for the purpose of maximizing their cubic capacity. But it's not SUV's and Trucks, Chargers, Challengers, Audi's 5, 6, 7, 8's etc use a lot too. Government policy needs to de-incentivize the consumer from buying these cars. i.e. i can understand why a contractor would buy a truck, or a family of 5 will buy a SUV. But a single person buying a 7-seat Chevy Tahoe? maybe similar to Speculation Tax, you need to pay a tax on gas guzzlers unless there's a good reason why you have a gas guzzler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HKSR Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 hours ago, Miss Korea said: I'm so excited to be watching Canucks superstar Vitali Kravtsov in the playoffs Who exactly do they think that is? A 9 in the jersey... JT Miller? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kettlevalley Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 Statement game again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coconuts Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 2 hours ago, Jaimito said: They asked him about MacKinnon vs AM, McDavid, which player he would build a team around. I agree with him. Same, there's not a player in the league who combines elite level talent with a relentless drive to win better than MacKinnon. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Long Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 4 hours ago, Jaimito said: were they able to score? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Screw Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 I’m calling a big game from Zadorov and EP40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Crossbar Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 BIG GAME HUGE GAME BIGGEST GAME STATEMENT GAME BUDDY BUDDY BUDDY DESMITH DESMITH EV GOOD EV BAD EV EV EV EV LOOK EV EV EV EV EV CANUCKS JUST WIN 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick_theRyper Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 7:30?! Wtf my son just told me, noooooo! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyBOI Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 Go Canucks GO!!!! we gonna win... woo woo woooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
112 Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 1 minute ago, PeteyBOI said: Go Canucks GO!!!! we gonna win... woo woo woooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!! This is the kind of energy we need. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwy19man Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 (edited) Duplicate post Edited March 13 by hwy19man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwy19man Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 3 minutes ago, Rick_theRyper said: 7:30?! Wtf my son just told me, noooooo! The start time for Canucks home games on weeknights should always be at 1930h Pacific! Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goose Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 COL may have their altitude but VAN can flex its PST zone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hwy19man Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 A reminder that this is not a national game in Canada, it is on Centre Ice and is a regional game on Sportsnet Pacific. Sportsnet made the wrong decision to not promote the game to national status for Wednesday Night Hockey, their #2 signature night! This is a bigger game than the national Capitals-Oilers game on Sportsnet One. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Arrogant Worms Posted March 13 Share Posted March 13 25 minutes ago, bh90 said: i agree and maybe that falls under government policy. SUV's and Trucks still have their place and can be more efficient than a truck if it's for the purpose of maximizing their cubic capacity. But it's not SUV's and Trucks, Chargers, Challengers, Audi's 5, 6, 7, 8's etc use a lot too. Government policy needs to de-incentivize the consumer from buying these cars. i.e. i can understand why a contractor would buy a truck, or a family of 5 will buy a SUV. But a single person buying a 7-seat Chevy Tahoe? maybe similar to Speculation Tax, you need to pay a tax on gas guzzlers unless there's a good reason why you have a gas guzzler Define a good reason. I drive a 4x4 Jeep which is a necessity when it snows where I live as our road is one of the last to get plowed. My wife also has to drive 45 mins to work in the winter. I also haul yard waste and other things around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts