the energy compromise

Discussion in 'Energy' started by busara, Aug 5, 2008.

  1. busara
    Offline

    busara wanasiasa wapumbava

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,501
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    PA
    Ratings:
    +87
    so here is the compromise developed by the "gang of 10"

    Energy compromise offers test for Obama, McCain - CNN.com

    thoughts?
     
  2. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816
    Except for the ANWR ban, and excluding the West Coast from offshore drilling... I like it... it is about what I have been calling for... though I would want more in there about expanding wind, natural gas, nuke, solar, etc... and I would like to see something calling for more refineries, since ours are now running in the 90+% capacity area
     
  3. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    I wanna know who gets THAT money and who is going to oversee it.
     
  4. busara
    Offline

    busara wanasiasa wapumbava

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,501
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    PA
    Ratings:
    +87
    agree with most of this. but i would rather the state decide whether to drill off their cost or in ANWR as it effects their beaches, etc.
     
  5. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,328
    Thanks Received:
    12,693
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,769
    I don't like it because Florida doesn't get a say and it brings drilling to 50 miles off the coast.
     
  6. DiamondDave
    Offline

    DiamondDave Army Vet

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2008
    Messages:
    18,169
    Thanks Received:
    2,812
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    MD, on the Potomac River
    Ratings:
    +2,816

    I agree with that.. I am saying lifting the federal 'ban' and allowing it that way... then going down to the states for their final decision



    Also.. after looking again... I am not really into this thing of handing out 'billions' from the government as 'incentive' towards research.... there is enough incentive to sell/produce energy and efficient vehicles, etc... the promise of profit is going to be there
     
  7. busara
    Offline

    busara wanasiasa wapumbava

    Joined:
    May 7, 2008
    Messages:
    1,501
    Thanks Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    PA
    Ratings:
    +87
    so long as oil prices stay high. there was a similar push toward alternatives in the 70's, but then the price came down and nearly all research ceased.
     
  8. Charles_Main
    Offline

    Charles_Main AR15 Owner

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2008
    Messages:
    16,692
    Thanks Received:
    2,238
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    Michigan, USA
    Ratings:
    +2,251
    Beaches? do you know anything about the area they want to drill in in ANWR. Beaches will not even be effected. ANWR is close to the already existing Alaska pipe line. Any oil drilled there will be piped down to the coast along already existing pipe line.

    I would also point out ANWR is 19 million acres and they only want to drill on 2000 acres of it. Imagine a postage stamp sitting on a tennis court. That is the area of ANWR they are talking about drilling on.
     
  9. Lode
    Offline

    Lode Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2008
    Messages:
    39
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Location:
    Tejas
    Ratings:
    +3
    I think, as it stands, it's a good starting point.

    We need heavy investment in nuclear power, and political will to put economic pressure on shifting away from oil in the transportation sector.

    The market will not take care of this by itself. That's because the markets only concerned with finding the cheapest resource to continue our energy needs. Since the oil infrastructures so developed, that's the cheapest.

    But that ignores the real costs of oil. Environmental and especially political. We need heavy investments in alternative fuel sources. Billions of dollars is right. My concern is when it actually goes to comittee those "billions of dollars for alternative fuel vehicles" will just be shifted into some tax breaks for automobile manufacturers making hybrids, which is completely the wrong direction.
     
  10. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Works for me.

    Seems sensible, but of course it's really about about details, isn't it?

    We allow drilling but the, when it comes time to find the money to invest in GREEN TECH, it won't be there.

    I want guarantees built in.
     

Share This Page