Originally Posted by BR
Are you incapable of thinking our country can lead the world in new technologies? Are you incapable of thinking that our country can do great things--not because it is easy, but because it is hard?
This is classic BR here, folks. Don't debate the issue. Instead, ask your opponent why he thinks the nation can't be a leader who does great things.SDW: I think we'll be using fossil fuels for a long time. We need more short-term supply while we develop alternative sources.
BR: We need to invest hundreds of billions more in alternative sources. We should forget about fossil fuel production and let the American family suffer with energy prices that are artificially high.
SDW: I disagree. We can do both, but alternative sources aren't ready for prime time.
BR: Why do you hate America?
Originally Posted by Frank777
Liberals try so hard to be futurists that they end up sabotaging their own ideas.
BR and Tonton believe themselves to be ahead of the curve, and talk down to anyone who understands reality.
No one is saying that renewables shouldn't be developed or that they will not be a significant part of the future economy. The question is whether governments ought to be dumping taxpayer money by the truckload into the pockets of a bunch of politically connected snake oil salesmen. All of whom, by no small coincidence, show up at the government's door claiming to be part of the "next-generation of energy production."
The answer, of course, is no. The private sector, disciplined by investor capital and supplemented by government-funded university research is more than capable of getting this tech to market. There is no question it is needed, and highly desired. There is no shortage of capital and government intrusion has only served
to damage the sector significantly.
Liberals with imagination, BR, are the source of most of our society's problems.
Well put. Very well put. I support alternative sources like wind, solar and geothermal. I'll go even further in stating that I support at least some level of government investment in these programs. But what we're doing now is insane. We are putting the government's boot on the throat of fossil fuel developers while we still rely heavily on those products. Then, we're throwing tens of billions at a green energy wall to see what sticks. We're subsidizing an electric car no one wants and which cannot make money. We're playing venture capitalist with upstart "green" energy firms we know are going to fail eventually. And through it all, our President is lying about oil production (claims production is up, but production on federal lands is actually down) and shirking responsibility for his program's failure.
For all the BR's out there that like to use strawman, this is my position on energy:
We need a short-term, mid-term, and long-term energy policy. Our first goal should be reducing our dependance on foreign oil. This requires much more domestic production, including on federal lands. We need to drill in the Gulf and in ANWR, as well as expedite permits elsewhere. Within ten years, we should have the goal of producing at least 75% of our oil here in the United States.
In the medium term, we should invest wisely in sources other than oil and coal. This includes wind, solar, geothermal as well as nuclear and natural gas. Within 25-30 years, our goal should be complete energy independence as a nation, with a combination of oil, coal, natural gas, nuclear, wind, solar and geothermal energy.
In the long-term, we should commit to reducing our oil and coal usage by 75% over the next 50 years. That is at least how long it will take to do this without drastically harming the economy, in my opinion. Within 75 years, we should virtually eliminate our dependence on fossil fuels.
This also requires some serious changes with the EPA and other agencies. It's virtually impossible to build a coal or nuclear plant (or oil refinery) in the United States today. That should not be the case.