posted on Oct, 15 2012 @ 07:40 AM
Originally posted by pacific_waters
Once again a libtard twists the facts to promote a lie. What Rep. Forbes and other republicans are objecting to is Navy Secretary Ray Mabus' plan to
Navy fuel being supplied by 50% alternative fuels by 2020.
A study, commissioned by the Department of Defense stated the Navy will need to buy 336 million gallons of renewable fuel per year in order to meet
its aim. Each gallon will cost between $1.43 and $5.24 more than petroleum. Which means the Navy could wind up spending an extra $1.76 billion
annually on biofuels. In comparison, a new destroyer costs about $1.6 billion, at a time when the shipbuilding budget is getting cut.
The question is simple, Should the Navy have an open-ended budget to buy fuels whatever the price? It's not only Republicans who are opposed. The
Democratic-controlled Senate Armed Services Committee went even further, blocking the Defense Department from helping build biofuel refineries unless
“specifically authorized by law. This is nothing more than an attempt by a political appointee to ram a political agenda down the throats of the
Navy. If the obama administration is concerned about relying on foreign energy sources perhaps it should look to push for expansion of US based oil
sources such as shale and coal gasification instead of pushing an agenda that calls for buying fuels that add at least 1.7 billion dollars to the
Navy's operating budget per annum.
It's hypocritical for the left to criticize oil company subsidies when Mabus' push is nothing more than a government bailout and funding of an
industry that can't make it on its own. Once again the WH is pushing for another Solyndra.
Oh my god you are right!!
In 588 years this would add a trillion dollars to the deficit...
That could make it 17 trillion instead of 16 trillion...
Whoa... And to think that's just a little under 6 centuries away.
Meanwhile the knowledge gained would be worthless I know.
People no understand.. Oil go bye bye.. Army trying to get off the power grid, Navy trying to make fuel.. And people think paper money is worth the
alternative oil production costs, so let them have their paper by all means..
So let's sit around and just use up all the easy energy. Once it's all gone, THEN, we can start using costly alternatives, because by that time
production costs will be cheap right? Solar panels are easy as heck to make without cheap oil, I am sure you know this.
I have a hint for you guys. There are plants and there is a sun. The earth is NOT a closed system. We are gaining energy. The most promising thing I
could see involving hydrogen is to get a plant to synthesize it using the sun's rays. Plants would work non stop, and not need electricity to produce
edit on 10/15/2012 by Dustytoad because: (no reason given)