I am a HUGE advocate of alternative energy because...

Now now, don't be throwing logic, reason and facts into this!

 

In my opinion, we may be better off giving tax breaks to people who invest in alternative energy instead of the alternative energy Firms, themselves.

 

There are currently state and federal tax credits for installing alternative energy...solar.

IMO all of this tax credit crap for alternative energy or other products/services, like hybrid-electric cars is political BS. If the products are not affordable to average Americans then the business models are not viable. All the tax credits/rebates do is allow Americans who can already afford a $25,000 Prius or solar system to game the system. What about the other 90% of Americans who don't have $25K to spend on these items?

 

You run out of good places to put them and they become far more expensive, not cheaper.

 

If there is a critical need to obtain some percentage of our energy from alternative sources...then we cannot worry too much about costs. If current alternative energy sources are too expensive then we must find new sources and/or technologies. Once again, if we have a critical need...then we must move forward doing something no matter the costs...

 

You're begging the question by starting out with "if" and then ignoring it to push alarmist delusions. The only critical need is to get rid of oil-company greed. They own the government, the media, and the phoney environmentalists. The oil belongs to the American people; corporations only rent it at our pleasure. Dissatisfied with this because of their criminally insane greed, the oil companies fabricated our present illusions. They are even behind the alternative-energy fraud, to re-inforce the false feeling that we have a shortage in cheaply recoverable energy. They admitted that fracking only cost 5 dollars a barrel. Logically, regular drilling must cost far less than that. Follow the money.

 

I say 'if' because not all people believe it is necessary. So the 'if' is in the eyes of the reader. IF a reader believes it is a critical issue, then alternative energy is mandatory.

I don't speak about 'alarmist delusions'??

Why must you and others give a rip about how much money oil companies and others earn? It is meaningless to go down this path of jealousy! Consumer prices are called consumer prices because they are mostly determined by consumers! If you don't like how much money someone earns, then stop spending your money with them!

You are so wrong; the oil companies ARE NOT owned by the 'government, media, and environmentalists'?? You like to think this but you and the tens of millions of consumers have 100 times more power and control. Problem is most people fail to follow through and create change because they don't wish to sacrifice anything. Then these same people try to blame others for all of 'their' problems...which is really silly. If you and others even cut back your consumption by 10% you would instantly have all the attention and control you need.

Your data and assumptions are lacking. Try reading this; http://www.technologyreview.com/new...uction-but-it-wont-bring-energy-independence/

"Just how much shale oil can be produced—and how fast—depends heavily on two factors: the price of oil, and how easy it is to overcome possible local objections to oil fracking, says Richard Sears, a former executive at Royal Dutch Shell and a visiting scientist at MIT. Oil shale costs significantly more to produce than oil in Saudi Arabia and many other parts of the world, so for oil companies to go after this resource, oil prices need to stay relatively high. It’s hard to put a firm number on it, but Sears estimates that $50 to $60 a barrel would be enough, compared to the $85 per barrel price of oil now. Houseknecht puts the cost of production at closer to $70 a barrel. Although costs for producing conventional oil in the Middle East also vary, they typically don’t change more than $10 per barrel."

 

In my opinion, it would not matter how much oil companies "earn", if we used similar income transfers to solve poverty in our republic; federal guidelines already exist. Or, we could simply ask the insurance sector, what they believe would be a reasonable form of minimum wage that also clears our poverty guidelines.

From that perspective, it has more to do with our privileges and immunities since corporate welfare recipients even have received multimillion dollar bonuses for "meeting their objectives".

For the least wealthy, meeting one's objective should be merely asking an employer for a job, and being turned down.

 

If someone steals my wallet, am I "jealous" because he now has more money than I do? The oil companies' wealth comes from extorting and cheating the consumer. Apologists for plutocrats always come up with impossible and undesirable alternatives for those who oppose them. If we could get the spoiled Zero-Growth Greenheads out of the anti-majority US government, we could nationalize our oil and gasoline would cost 12 cents a gallon. But apologists never suggest such a practical alternative. They are so conceited that they think they can define our choices without a self-serving bias.

 

The US military is the largest consumer of oil on planet Earth. Why do you believe the US government does not produce their own oil and refine their own fuels...if doing so would only cost taxpayers $.12/gallon?

 

Because even our federal Congress may not have that authority without an actual War going on.

 

When it comes to alternative energy why does it have to be either/or. We can reduce waste in agriculture by converting wastes to energy and solve some of the disposal problems of animal waste and produce energy in the process. I just read an article in Nat Geo that estimates that if pig farms had their manure converted into crude oil (it can be done) we could save 1.5 billion a year on crude oil imports. And hog producers could make an additional 5 dollars to 10 dollars a hog. Many feedlots and dairy operations are generating methane from cattle waste and using the brownwater for fertilizer and the leftover cellulose for bedding.

Basic geothermal heat pumps could save a lot of money for homeowners and reduce energy consumption considerably. Even a sun room added to the south side of the house could reduce heating bills in cold winter areas. I reckon it would be the north side of the house if you live south of the equator. With good insulation you could just open the door when the sun shines and close it at night.

Alternative energy can be less expensive and when used with existing energy sources very doable.

 

Why does the military pay $300 for a hammer? That's what the Military-Industrial Complex is all about.

 

That is a good question since it should be considered immoral to wage War on a for profit basis under our republican form of Government with its emphasis on equality over mere capital wealth.

 

I didn't think you would explain your $.12/gallon comment...

 

For many decades now we have known about insulation properties of building materials, solar heating, breezeway cooling, earthen homes, solar power generation, solar heat blankets/systems for hot water, etc. And yet today in 2012 our government and citizenry still do not mandate that we maximize these benefits when we build new structures...why?

Why is most new home development twice as large as most people/families need? Why can't we easily find 800-1000-1200 square foot homes? Why are we creating properties which require lots of water to maintain and large homes which require lots of energy?

Always the answer is MONEY!!

When you think about how we design and build homes, how we design cities, very little of this pays attention to water and energy consumption. We waste and waste and waste because water and electricity is relatively cheap. Why do anything different, why consider alternative energies, or smaller homes/properties, etc. when most people worry 1000% more about other things? We will always have a few people who do things different and/or better...like 5% but we never manage the other 95%...

 

I was simply pointing out the fact that a lot of alternatives are out there and a lot of them are fully developed and simple.

If people choose not to take advantage of them it is not because they do not exist. Not much simpler than passive solar or adding a sun room to cut heating bills. Even solar panels are pretty simple to install.

 

People and business in the US have been in a 'transition' phase regarding alternative energies for the past 30-40 years. Options have been available, and continue to improve, but it's hard for the masses to consider change from the status quo. And governments and utility companies don't make this transition easy! So like so many 'new' things, the typical 5% of Americans give it a go while the masses are comfortable with the status quo.

I'm guessing unless there is a crisis we will remain in this 'transition' phase for a few more decades...

 

The answer is freedom. You want to live that way fine. Quit trying to force everyone else.

 

Good News:



Russia will not renew its commitment to the Kyoto Protocol.


Moscow won’t join the second phase of the Kyoto Protocol, which starts on January 1st 2013.

Russia decided to discontinue its participation in the protocol because the world’s major producers of greenhouse gases – the United States, China and India – are still refusing to commit themselves to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Because of that, Russian leaders say, the Kyoto Protocol, which came into force seven years ago, had no impact on the rate of global warming.

Voice of Russia, Mayak
http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_12_31/Russia-wont-renew-Kyoto-Protocol/

 

Alternative energy is a novel idea, but the real question is, will humanity not kill itself prior to the realization of alternative energy? We aren't anywhere near close, and we already know the answer, and can't figure out how to make it work for us now...

 

In my opinion, discovering perfect knowledge of any Thing that may promote the general welfare only requires such needful buildings, for that purpose.

 

You are always free within the policies and laws of the nation in which you live.

Regarding alternative energy and public energy and global climate change...when those who demand their 'freedom' are incapable of doing better in the best interest of the collective we, wasting energy, ignoring climate data, etc. and when such actions become a burden on society, because all you do is think about yourself, since it is a SOCIETY in which you and the rest of us co-inhabit, instead of hiding behind your perceived and entitled personal freedom, you really need to support and participate the efforts of the collective we.

 

Alternative energy is not a 'novel idea'? Alternative energy is a viable energy supplement.

But it no longer makes any difference to Obama and Congress since the bill Obama is signing for the fiscal cliff includes law to regard coal-fired energy created by Indians to be considered 'alternative energy'...

 

Electric cars have been around just as long as gasoline powered cars. The materials used to make those batteries come from massive strip mining operations in China, and you know how environmentally friendly China is. Pretty much anyone that buys an electric car is just patting themselves on the back and doesn't care about what happens to the batteries when they are switched out for new ones every few years. It is a feel good move, nothing more.

I don't have any particular problem with solar as we are getting very close to making fairly cheap panels that last awhile and convert at least 50% of the sun's light into energy within a few years according to some article I read. Wind is just plain stupid and inefficient and incredibly inconsistent to ever be a reliable source of energy.