Ethanol not is effective, Now Natural Gas not as cheap (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

OrionTheWolf -> Ethanol not is effective, Now Natural Gas not as cheap (6/26/2011 7:12:21 AM)

The next area governments are looking at to provide subsidies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html

Sometimes it almost seems like the money thrown at some of these energy programs, are like lottery scratch off tickets. They are hoping against the odds it will pay off. This article actually has a data analyst use the words ponzi scheme.



Edwynn -> RE: Ethanol not is effective, Now Natural Gas not as cheap (6/26/2011 8:51:20 AM)




If we ever get the focus away from "how to get more" and rather towards "how to use less" then we might be hitting on something here. And I don't mean everybody having to become ascetics, but instead having technology do the job for us. That's what evolution is about, isn't it?

here's an example:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=11823654

I read in another news article where it is explained that this plane uses 20% less fuel. That is huge, if we could just keep going with that.

I'm sorry to disappoint some people here (though I don't think you yourself are among them), but higher fuel prices are the only path to our evolution in this regard. Any two classes in economics would convince most people that subsidies of any sort are 'EBIL!,' but limited and time cut-offs for some energy-saving technological efforts might be acceptable.

For those who read PheonixPower's thread on the German nuclear shutdown, they are doing away with nuclear and reducing subsidies for solar power all at the same time, because solar is busting out of the gates on is own merits.

Now that's class!





MasterSlaveLA -> RE: Ethanol not is effective, Now Natural Gas not as cheap (6/26/2011 3:15:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

The next area governments are looking at to provide subsidies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/us/26gas.html



From the link...

"Natural gas companies have been placing enormous bets on the wells they are drilling, saying they will deliver big profits and provide a vast new source of energy for the United States... But the gas may not be as easy and cheap to extract from shale formations deep underground as the companies are saying"

With regard to the above, I say:

1)  If any company stands to make "big profits" from this, then they can pay for it on their own.

2)  If it turns out to be harder and more costly than anticipated, then tough-noogies... again, if they stand to "profit", then they can pay for it.

Personally, I'm more in favor of letting things go the way of the "hybrid car" model, whereby early on, the Government gave INCENTIVES to CONSUMERS to switch to hybrids.  So if the push is towards Natrual Gas, then let the Government incentivize CONSUMERS ("We the People") to drive adoption and use -- thus, both increasing the market, and justifying the investment for those who seek to profit from said market.

[:)]





Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125