wncs,

Good question.

On Dec 8, 10:59 pm, wncs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 -- 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.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to