How important is energy independence?

[Some Guy]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

 

[martybegan]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

Until some form of power storage more efficent then current batteries or using multi-level fluid potential energy storage than intermittent forms of power such as solar and wind will never be able to take over a portion of our grid's base load.

The big holdout is fusion power, which always seems to be "25 years away." Until then for electrical generation fission based nuclear using the most modern type of reactor possible is the only way to preserve out stocks of fossil fuels.

We should be exploiting our own stocks of fossils as much as possible, along with research into the areas above.

 

[Intense]

I'm Pro Independence/Interdependence. We need to stop ignoring Natural Gas, and stop misusing our Natural Resources, including Agriculture/Corn. The more we Centralize, the less control we have, and the more susceptible we are to Centralized Control, Higher Surcharges, Higher Prices, and Rationing. All functioning Coal Plants need to be upgraded, ASAP, not obstructed from doing so. Hydro needs to also be modernized.

 

[martybegan]

I'm Pro Independence/Interdependence. We need to stop ignoring Natural Gas, and stop misusing our Natural Resources, including Agriculture/Corn. The more we Centralize, the less control we have, and the more susceptible we are to Centralized Control, Higher Surcharges, Higher Prices, and Rationing. All functioning Coal Plants need to be upgraded, ASAP, not obstructed from doing so. Hydro needs to also be modernized.

The problem with decentralizing the grid would be wastage when one region has extra power and another is short. Currently you can shunt the high voltage feeds around to keep everything in balance.

The key to improving the grid is the "smart grid" technology. The problem is a possible civil liberty issue, that once installed the power company is real-time transmitted your power consumption.

I do agree with upgrading our existing plants. What needs to be done is remove the regulation that requires a full compliance with new air laws when you even try to do a slight upgrade. Allowing some flexibility with this would allow upgrades to commence without them being cost ineffective.

 

[FA_Q2]

Extremely important. We need to be able to cease trading with those countries that are our enemies. We also need to have the independence to be able to intervene if they ever decide to manipulate the market. It is also unlikely to ever happen…

How unfortunate.

 

[chikenwing]

Just about as important as air

 

[FA_Q2]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

Until some form of power storage more efficent then current batteries or using multi-level fluid potential energy storage than intermittent forms of power such as solar and wind will never be able to take over a portion of our grid's base load.

The big holdout is fusion power, which always seems to be "25 years away." Until then for electrical generation fission based nuclear using the most modern type of reactor possible is the only way to preserve out stocks of fossil fuels.

We should be exploiting our own stocks of fossils as much as possible, along with research into the areas above.

And using current nuclear. It is sinful the resistance we have to using nuclear. The amount of pollution it creates is miniscule compared with other forms of power generation that we are using right now and the danger is extremely small.

 

[Twofox]

I think that developing our own resources will keep alot of the money here., but not all, after all they are still multi-national companies. BUT, we won't be sending it all overseas, so I'm for it.

We have a ton of NG, and while it burns cleaner than gasoline and diesel, it still has known cardinogens.

Corn? Why waste food? Switchgrass is what Brazil is using I believe. There are also other grasses that contain sugars.

Algae can be used to create a workable oil product as I understand it.

So, the plan should be to develop and use our own resources, while setting up conditions so that the private sector will develop new alternatives. X Prize anyone?

 

[eflatminor]

We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map.

The vast majority of the oil we use in America comes from this hemisphere. Most of it comes from right here in America with the rest coming from Canada, Mexico and Brasil. More importantly, it's a WORLD market for all types of energy. The price is determined by supply and demand around the world. There really is no way to keep profits from Middle Eastern oil producers, not as long as the world demands oil.

We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

Correct. The money being put into green energy is other people's money. The market, the technology...it's coming along but just not there. Eventually, sure, but throwing money at it now is unwise and when the feds do it, unconstitutional.

...we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

Yep.

 

[Wiseacre]

We must not be at the mercy of OPEC, anybody who remembers the oil embargo in the early 70s knows that.

Other side of the coin is doing better at energy conservation. We gotta do better at reducing consumption.

 

[martybegan]

We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map.

The vast majority of the oil we use in America comes from this hemisphere. Most of it comes from right here in America with the rest coming from Canada, Mexico and Brasil. More importantly, it's a WORLD market for all types of energy. The price is determined by supply and demand around the world. There really is no way to keep profits from Middle Eastern oil producers, not as long as the world demands oil.

We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

Correct. The money being put into green energy is other people's money. The market, the technology...it's coming along but just not there. Eventually, sure, but throwing money at it now is unwise and when the feds do it, unconstitutional.

...we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

Yep.

I dont see it as unconstitutional, just a waste of resources when used to prop up companies using unsound business models.

 

[eflatminor]

We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map.

The vast majority of the oil we use in America comes from this hemisphere. Most of it comes from right here in America with the rest coming from Canada, Mexico and Brasil. More importantly, it's a WORLD market for all types of energy. The price is determined by supply and demand around the world. There really is no way to keep profits from Middle Eastern oil producers, not as long as the world demands oil.



Correct. The money being put into green energy is other people's money. The market, the technology...it's coming along but just not there. Eventually, sure, but throwing money at it now is unwise and when the feds do it, unconstitutional.

...we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

Yep.

I dont see it as unconstitutional, just a waste of resources when used to prop up companies using unsound business models.

It's that too.

 

[Jackson]

There is absolutely no down side to energy independence. Along with the reasons already mentioned, it will produce that three letter word, J-O-B-S! as Biden so intelligently pointed out!

 

[AmyNation]

I would list it as very important. We are far and above more independent now than we were 40 years ago, in part do to our government push. I also think its important for the goverment to invest money in alternative energy. The market isnt there for it right now, but the last thing we want is when it does get to a point where other option are more viable, that other countries have already cornered the maket by investing early.

 

[M14 Shooter]

With the exception of fuel for motor vehicles, the US -is- energy independent -- we are, presently, more than capable of producing a huge net energy surplus.

 

[Againsheila]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

I say we need to work on getting homes off the grid. I'm tired of all these stupid bills. Water, sewer, electricity, gas, garbage, phone, etc. And each one of these items is taxed, some of them have more than 1/2 doz different taxes on them. How about we go back to building smart homes? Homes that are designed for whatever climate you live in. Like here in the pacific northwest we could save a lot of money simply by having cisterns, a place for the water to go when it rains so that we can use that water later for our gardens etc. Wind turbines should be allowed in the cities so that we could save some money on electricity. It's getting to the point that we are going to have to sell our house just because we can't afford all the utilities for it, and that's not even including the taxes. And no, my house wasn't in a city when I bought it, but it is now, and I haven't moved. I feel like we are getting crushed under all these regulations.

 

[MeadHallPirate]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

ahoy Some Guy,

*ponders and stares at the afternoon sun*

i think on a practical level, energy independence would be a mighty thing fer our nation, matey. on a realistic, what-be-possible level, i don't think it be a practical thing to strive fer.

i mean, i think if we were willin' to just burn tons 'o coal every day, and construct a bunch 'o nuclear reactors (providin' the government was willin' to pay fer such things), we might achieve independence - but we'd also be foulin' our air incredibly and we'd be creatin' radioactive waste that'll be toxic fer thousands 'o years (and we've currently no place to store this lethal waste).

if thar was some interest in thorium power, the United States could be very energy independent, but that requires both R&D and long term plannin', no longer a forte 'o our great and powerful nation.

imma hopin' that the current collaboration 'o Bill Gates and the China National Nuclear Corporation will yield result in thorium tech that perhaps we can oneday purchase from the Chinese. thats me hope.

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

 

[flacaltenn]

Mitt brought this up in his speech last night. I'd like to hear some views on this. I'm not an expert, but to me, it seems incredibly important. We're sending billions overseas to countries that would prefer to see us wiped off the map. We're putting millions into green energy initiatives that don't seem close to being able to support the energy demand of this country all alone.

I'm definitely in favor of green energy, but until it can stand on it's own without being artificially propped up via government policy and regulation to limit the production of traditional means (coal, gas, etc), we need to be actively allowing domestic companies to produce and supply coal, gas, nuclear, etc, responsibly of course.

What say you?

Whoa... Step back from all that political sputum and get the big picture..

As M14Shooter pointed out ---

America IS energy independent when it comes to electrical supply !!!

The political argument is that the Left doesn't LIKE the energy we use for electrical generation. So they not only want to replace large portions of the EXISTING generation, they want to shift the ENTIRE TRANSPORTATION sector to the GRID.. Requiring MASSIVE ADDITIONS to existing electrical generation and distribution. They declare CO2 as a pollutant and make war on a gas that you have higher concentrations of in your lungs then in the air around you..

So they give a weak (largely non-starter) list of ALTERNATIVES (that aren't really alternatives at all) where --

Solar won't charge your vehicle AT NIGHT or in higher latitudes -- and you'll be waiting DAYS for the wind to blow so that you charge your car.. Does ANY of that make sense?

Of course not.

They are telling you to pull 1W chargers out of the wall, turn DOWN your thermostats and buy squiggly light bulbs so that your Planet-Saving neighbor can add a 220V 40A circuit to his house just to charge his car for a 50 mile range.

Does THAT make sense? No...

If CO2 IS the problem that gonna kill the planet -- the answer would be to build out 220 new nuclear plants TOMORROW and fix it.. Do you hear a plea from the left to do that?

Are they more afraid of boiling water with nuclear than the Global Warming threat? Evidently they are....

So how SHOULD we make the transport sector ---"Energy Independent"?

One available approach is to convert a large portion of it to FUEL CELLS. These COULD run on Nat Gas for now and produce clean running vehicles. Longer term -- run the Fuel Cells on HYDROGEN which is produced by OFF GRID SOLAR AND WIND !!!.. That is a better way to store and harness those "free and renewable" energies.

Push for Biofuels that DON'T displace food crops.. Again produced with OFF GRID renewables.

Why don't hear simple effective stuff like that? Because your political leadership is technologically retarded and brainwashed by their own ideological goals..

Get rid of ALL SUBSIDIES for existing methods and sources. And instead focus on STRATEGIC R&D goals towards distributed nuclear power, biofuels, OFF-GRID production of energy and chemicals from renewables, and hydrogen infrastructure.

You'll NEVER HEAR ANY of this during the election cycle.. All you'll get is USELESS rhetoric and "feelings"...

 

[antagon]

The government does not control this matter.

 

[Wolfmann]

Hello

Some Guy I strongly suggest that you get hold of and watch the documentary Carbon Nation. In the context of this video it does not matter whether you believe in global warming or not but it will answer objectively most if not all of your questions.

Thanks

Wolfman 24

PS all of the information presented in the video is verifiiable.