Switch-grass, now there's a term I haven't heard in, oh, almost three years, since Bush mentioned it in a SOTU address. Wonder what ever happened to that?
On Dec 8, 8:22�pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > jgg, > > No requirement we must disagree on EVERY issue. > There is no magic bullet, no one source solution. Use what works where > it is most workable. Making ethanol out of corn was, and is, stupid. > Many other crops that are more efficient to convert to energy, hemp > and switch-grass to name two. That is just one small example. > > On Dec 8, 4:28�pm, jgg1000a <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > We disagree on many things... �But not on this critical point... > > Until the 60's we controlled both production and demand... �By the 70 > > we made a deal with the Saudis (who by then controlled production) > > concerning the price of oil... � Now we no longer control the demand > > (China does)... �Not to be aggressive on Alternative Energy now, as > > well as drilling IMHO, is redoing Nero's watching Rome burn.... > > > The trick is to spend the DEVELOPMENTAL cost of Alternate Energy > > seeking sources whose cost of production is $30-$40 dollars �a > > barrel... �The developmental cost of computer hardware is high, but > > with mass production the cost of the hardware becomes cheap fast... > > > On Dec 8, 5:12�pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > wncs, > > > > History shows that we will do nothing about alternative fuels untill > > > we are forced to. During the OPEC oil embargo of 1973 politicians on > > > BOTH sides made loud and passionate speeches about how "the U.S. will > > > never agin be held hostage by OPEC, we will poor billions into > > > research & developement of alternatives,blah-blah-blah". > > > As soon as the oil flow was continued, prices dropped and the gas > > > lines disappered we went right back to our old ways and soon were > > > importing even more oil. We've had 35 freakin' years to prepare and > > > did next to NOTHING. > > > > On Dec 8, 2:52�pm, wncs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > They say that necessity is the mother of invention, so to an extent > > > > you're right that we may not explore alternatives as long as the > > > > current way is convenient. However, there is also the fact that people > > > > are losing their jobs, their homes, etc., and any economic break we > > > > can have, we will take. Personally I am grateful for the low gas > > > > prices currently. It might slow down the urgency of exploring > > > > alternatives, but I think most Americans realize the need for a long- > > > > term solution. We have experienced gas prices close to $5 and also > > > > shortages in my area for weeks during September, so I think that is > > > > still fresh in our minds and the need for new research won't be > > > > forgotten, just slowed perhaps. > > > > > On Dec 8, 3:37�pm, Hollywood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > Exactly right. If oil/gas prices are low why develop alternatives? > > > > > And that is exactly why oil/gas prices are low right now, to make > > > > > certain alternatives are NOT developed. To SOME extent Brokow is > > > > > correct. > > > > > > On Dec 8, 11:43�am, jgg1000a <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > Low gas prices will ensure alternate energy is NOT developed... � > > > > > > That > > > > > > is the problem unstated here... > > > > > > > On Dec 8, 10:45�am, Philobealo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > If you needed any more proof that liberal media members don't > > > > > > > give a > > > > > > > darn about the state of the economy or the American people, and > > > > > > > instead just want to raise taxes, you got it Sunday when Tom > > > > > > > Brokaw > > > > > > > advocated gas prices, which have plummeted recently, be kept at > > > > > > > $4 a > > > > > > > gallon with government keeping the added cost. > > > > > > > > Coming just two days after it was announced that America lost over > > > > > > > 500,000 jobs in November, Brokaw, in what could be his last > > > > > > > performance as "Meet the Press" host, actually asked Barack Obama > > > > > > > why > > > > > > > taxes shouldn't be dramatically raised on gasoline with revenues > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > spent on alternative energy, and to send a signal that folks > > > > > > > won't be > > > > > > > able to "just fill up [their] tank for 20 bucks anymore."- Hide > > > > > > > quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
