Pub BS pt.6: Clean energy is big money.

[francoHFW]

The Job-Creating Mercury Rule
The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia

Politics is behind the Republicans’ latest attacks on clean air rules, but those rules are likely to create many more jobs than they eliminate.

 

[francoHFW]

The tactic, which has been used successfully only once, allows a simple majority in the Senate and House to nullify a federal regulation, forcing the executive branch to start from scratch the laborious, multiyear process of writing a new one. Mr. Inhofe must know he is unlikely to win. His goal appears to be to force Democrats to vote to support what he calls Mr. Obama’s “job-killing” environmental agenda — following on the Republicans’ relentless denunciation of the president’s sound decision to shelve the Keystone XL oil pipeline and his steady support for clean-energy investments. Yet no matter what the Republican leadership claims, the clean-energy sector is a much more likely source of future job growth than the fossil-fuel industries they are so determined to protect. And the new clean air rules Mr. Inhofe so abhors are likely to create far more jobs than they eliminate.

The Job-Creating Mercury Rule - Google Search

 

[hortysir]

Regulations only create jobs for bureaucrats

 

[Mr. H.]

"Clean energy" job growth requires hard federal dollars. "Free money" so to speak. And those jobs are not self-sustaining.

Fossil fuel jobs require little to nothing from the government in terms of currency, and are self-sustaining and self-perpetuating. Private investment trumps government giveaways anyday.

 

[Old Rocks]

Then why the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry?

The fossil fuel industry is not self sustaining. Every decade we have to go deeper, do more to sustain the amount that we need. And every decade it gets more expensive to do so, in terms of cost to the consumer for the product, in environmental degradation. From the massive open pit coal mines to the destroyed aquifers for natural gas, the cost mounts. And, in the lifetime of those alive today, we will have exhausted the fossil fuel that can be obtained at a rational cost.

 

[hortysir]

Then why the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry?

The fossil fuel industry is not self sustaining. Every decade we have to go deeper, do more to sustain the amount that we need. And every decade it gets more expensive to do so, in terms of cost to the consumer for the product, in environmental degradation. From the massive open pit coal mines to the destroyed aquifers for natural gas, the cost mounts. And, in the lifetime of those alive today, we will have exhausted the fossil fuel that can be obtained at a rational cost.

I'll await that evidence.

 

[chikenwing]

Then why the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry?

The fossil fuel industry is not self sustaining. Every decade we have to go deeper, do more to sustain the amount that we need. And every decade it gets more expensive to do so, in terms of cost to the consumer for the product, in environmental degradation. From the massive open pit coal mines to the destroyed aquifers for natural gas, the cost mounts. And, in the lifetime of those alive today, we will have exhausted the fossil fuel that can be obtained at a rational cost.

What was that solar panels company name again??you know the one were so much money didn't make a difference?

Nature gas is getting cheaper,and not one aquifer has been destroyed.

 

[Mr. H.]

Then why the subsidies to the fossil fuel industry?

The fossil fuel industry is not self sustaining. Every decade we have to go deeper, do more to sustain the amount that we need. And every decade it gets more expensive to do so, in terms of cost to the consumer for the product, in environmental degradation. From the massive open pit coal mines to the destroyed aquifers for natural gas, the cost mounts. And, in the lifetime of those alive today, we will have exhausted the fossil fuel that can be obtained at a rational cost.

Post up some "subsidies" to the fossil fuel industry. And I don't mean re-flagged ships or naval armadas "protecting" U.S. bound crude- those are crutches for lame argument.

Private investment and risk are what sustains fossil fuels, not government guaranteed loans or agri-style subsidies. Demand-driven markets and not artificially created or mandated government programs attract capital and create equity resulting in job creation.

Technological advances and efficient business modeling allow new frontiers to be accessed and new reserves to be discovered more effectively and efficiently and this will continue well into the next century.

Agriculture has been destroying aquifers and polluting our air for the past 100 years and will continue to do so.
And considering the massive amounts of hydrocarbons extracted from our lands and waters the overall impact has been minimal.