posted on Apr, 6 2005 @ 08:15 PM
Many good points.
particularly the first link from seekerof.
It points out oil is a more powerful energy producing method than any other.
which means that big energy users(industry) will be the last to give in.
Whatever we switch to, it needs to be sooner rather than later.
we cant really continue to use the fuel we have now, due to the need of it in the future (it would make a great backup source).
Change will be difficult. what is interesting though is that gas has remained cheap all these years. If it was equated to any other commodity, it
would be three times what it costs.
Some of that is the natural process of industry building.
The introduction years are always the most expensive.
Any method we choose to develop will become much cheaper thru evolution of operation.
We do need to start using wind and solar in rural areas, so that the density of the solar acreage and danger to birds is not high. Many people dont
know how easy it is to convert a house to an efficient comfortable space. No compromise of lifestyle neccessary, just a new bank loan to pay, instead
of an electricity bill.
Local integration of biodeisel generators is a realistic option.
Basically, we can break down the usage of "oil fuel" energy production to mainly Industry, while every other segment of population can start to find
The reason i say this, is Big Oil is powerful, and they will need a concession to allow development of other fuels, and energy production. (just look
at patents for alternative energy sources. big oil owns many). And industrial giants might support a fuel cell energy generator for PR purposes, but
most others will still want a cheap alternative. The good news is, that once the civilian population accepts and adopts energy alternatives, the
costs will have decreased considerably.
I would like to use the ideas generated on this thread for an open letter to all of the senate and house members. Perhaps if enough PR can be
stirred, This could end up as a suggestion form for introducing a related bill. I think everyone could appreciate an America that uses less oil, and
produces no less electricity
AND develops for its own use and export new cheaper alternative energy sources...
be they biodiesel, wind generators, solar cells (there is quite a buying spree for american solar cells right now) or whatever we come up with.
djohnsto77 I agree that the new nuclear reactors are much better than the old ones, but we still havent figured out how to get rid of the radiotive
material we have right now, much less the small amount more that the new plants would generate. zerosum... the point is to put money where it will do
the most good over the long haul... not just another stopgap...
I think we leave nuclear out unless it is a non waste producing design.
[edit on 6-4-2005 by LazarusTheLong]