Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MIT issues call to arms on energy ~ need policies to avert a "perfect storm" forming around energy.
CNET ^ | May 3, 2006, 2:26 PM PDT | Martin LaMonica Staff Writer

Posted on 05/04/2006 1:53:00 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last
To: Dark Skies

Some one might have believed you.....ROFL!


21 posted on 05/04/2006 2:53:57 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
Lemme guess...so funny you forgot to laugh...


22 posted on 05/04/2006 2:53:58 PM PDT by Dark Skies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

I thought it was true when I was a child...but now I realize I was an idiot...well at least a nerd.


23 posted on 05/04/2006 2:55:02 PM PDT by Dark Skies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; All
I have been covering, ( Or, as Seamole puts it...-backhoe's pseudoblog--... ) pseudo-blogging, this issue for years, so allow me to drop out of Lurk & Link mode for a rare bit of commentary-- we all need to get serious about our dependency on foreign sources of energy, and use our own resources.

Our consumer-based economy is driven by and dependent upon readily-available, reliable energy-- choke that off, and we'll all be back to using one rotary dial phone in the dining room, watching one TV in the living room, and driving one car per family-- probably a Hudson Hornet or a Nash Metropolitan...

We need to

1) end the nonsensical ban on offshore drilling off California and Florida--read & weep:
Castro Plans to Drill 45 Miles from US Shores, But We Can't

2) build a lot of next-generation nuclear power plants, not just for electricity, but for any process requiring heat, power, or steam.
And if we replaced our existing nuclear plants with
this one there would be significant benefits.

3) end Jimmy Carter's idiotic ban on recycling nuclear waste, and reprocess the stuff rather than fighting over where to bury it. Europe has done this for decades.-- what to do with spent nuclear fuel? Answer here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1468321/posts?page=50#50 hattip:  Mike (former Navy Nuclear Engineer)

4) use the 300-500 years worth of coal we have on our own land, using the new clean-coal technology.
-Clean Coal Centre--

5) and finally, there's nothing wrong with conservation, we should all practice it- but you can't conserve your way out of a shortage. Nor is there anything wrong with "alternative" energy sources- except they don't supply the vast ( not to mention readily-available ) amounts of power we need at a price competitive to more conventional sources. Then again, there is this to ponder:
Energy From the Gulf Stream
http://www.energy.gatech.edu/presentations/mhoover.pdf

We do need to get serious about this before we get strangled by a bunch of petty thieves and dictators who don't like us much.

My tongue-in-cheek collection of energy-related links:

Sticker Shock-$3 a gallon gas? Click the picture:

And kindly note, and note well-- the first reply to this post ( when gas was $1.45 a gallon ) was derisive... so, who's laughing now?

Vest-Pocket Summary:

1- drill for gas & oil like crazy- onshore, offshore, and in Alaska
2- go nuclear for power
3- convert stationary plants to clean coal technology or Next-Gen Nuclear
4- slash taxes and regulations like crazy


24 posted on 05/04/2006 3:00:21 PM PDT by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pissant
If I knew where, chances are I'd be freeping from my Chateau in the Grand Tetons, not from my office desk

Thats the problem, they don't know either.

25 posted on 05/04/2006 3:16:38 PM PDT by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

free market at work!!! but don't expect the media to blow a trumpet.


26 posted on 05/04/2006 3:18:18 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (Orthodoxy: The antidote to the Dictatorship of the Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
issues related to . . . global warming and climate change--from pollution "are not going away."

Wow! This lady IS a genius. They can't go away if the NEVER EXISTED. She shore is smart.

27 posted on 05/04/2006 3:22:50 PM PDT by Hardastarboard (Why isn't there an "NRA" for the rest of my rights?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
Thanks for dropping by.....Foxnews special report made mention of a consumer survey that said over 50& of consumers thought we should be drilling in Alaska and the gulf..... and that we were not doing enough to overcome the environmental blockage on exploring for Oil....hopefully someone will post the survey if it hasn't been yet....
28 posted on 05/04/2006 4:20:57 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
Resource item:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/oil_market_basics/Demand_text.htm

29 posted on 05/04/2006 4:24:42 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach

Always good to hear from you, Ernest_at_the_Beach.


30 posted on 05/04/2006 4:27:19 PM PDT by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
This must be the survey,....it's buried though:

05/04/06 FOX News Poll: Gas Prices a Problem, but Not a Crisis

*****************************AN EXCERPT ***********************************

Fully 79 percent of Americans think giving tax incentives to companies to encourage development of alternatives fuel would help the energy situation, and 68 percent think it would help to drill in the and the Gulf of Mexico.

Consumers have mixed views on whether $100 rebate checks to taxpayers (40 percent help, 42 percent hurt) and relaxing environmental standards (46 percent help, 44 percent hurt) would do more good or more harm. Two-thirds think it would hurt the long-term energy situation to raise gas prices above $5 dollars a gallon to encourage conservation (65 percent).

Overall, Americans now lean toward focusing on the supply problem. By a 49 percent to 35 percent margin, the public thinks the better way to reduce dependence on foreign oil is to increase supply by drilling more in the United States rather than decreasing demand by requiring conservation.

31 posted on 05/04/2006 4:42:51 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
Posted the Survey for comments.:

FNC Poll: 05/04/06 FOX News Poll: Gas Prices a Problem, but Not a Crisis ~ increase supply...

32 posted on 05/04/2006 4:54:10 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (History is soon Forgotten,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: ConsentofGoverned

What government grants? Have a look at the US DOE website; the grants are very few. If a scientist wants a grant, he or she should apply to an oil or coal corporation. They have the grant money. Exxon alone has doled out more than $18 million alone in grants to scientists who are willing to support its ideology. That's just one company.


33 posted on 05/04/2006 6:01:06 PM PDT by kiwiexpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-33 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson