If we can't drill our way out of it, or alternative-energy our way out of it, what do Greens suggest?

Question

Your honest opinions on this news item are sought:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/jun/18/solar-plant-builders-decry-freeze/

Answer 1

I suggest nuclear powered hydrogen production until solar power becomes more practical and efficient.

I must reply to the first answer, ethanol is made out of "field corn," not the kind that humans typically eat. It is used to feed cattle and livestock. Also, ethanol only uses the starch part of the corn, leaving the protein and oil which end up as by products fed to animals. This is discussed by Patrick Bedard in this month's issue of Car and Driver magazine. The increase in price of corn for food is due to the rise of labor and energy costs.

Answer 2

Drilling takes a long time to deliver new sources of oil.  According to the EIA, it would take nearly 10 years before we could build the infrastructure necessary to see the 1st drop of oil.  Then about 10 years to drain it.  Clearly, we need to do something now....

There are only 2 things I can think of that we can do NOW to stem the tide of oil demand.  

1. Conserve.  Drive slower, plan you errands and do them all on one day of the week, etc, etc.  

2. Support Alternative energy sources.  I have attached a link that I find exciting in this area.  It's a solar-assisted Prius.  After the modification, it will get about 21 miles per day from sunlight alone.  21 miles will get many people home from work for free.  Check it out for yourself.

Answer 3

i agree , corn based ethanol is not the way to go, it drives up food prices. i think sugar beets would be better, the government owns a lot of land that could be leased out  for growing sugar beets . most areas can get 2 crops a year . we are sucking up to vietmanese  , why cant we normalize relations with cuba ???we could import a lot of sugar cane from them and they are just about 90 mile from us. alternate fuek=ls arent going to be much cheaper but at least we would not be held hostage by every arab nation with an oil well.

Answer 4

The "rank & file" green is caught up in the moment of the protest for the day.  The "Big Shot" green is caught up in the moment of making big $$$Green$$$.

Big Oil & Big Environmentalism share the same B$E$D$!  I'll lay ya a dollar on a dime that every time the major managed news media mentions drilling or refinement of crude that the Big Environmentalist movement/concern is mentioned IMMEDIATELY afterwards!!!  Even my women, after I told her of this gimmick, was literally stupefied from seeing this time & again on the boob tube!  She gave up on keeping track as it is now routine.

There's two fields of thought on the supply of crude.  One is that it's supply is dependent on decaying vegetation/fossils,  the other that crude is self regenerating through natural cycling.  The term is SOMETHING LIKE...a-bio??? & b-bio???  The crude fields seem to regenerate after a time, leading MANY scientists to speculate that the generation of crude is an on going NATURAL process independent of the so called fossil fuel theory.

Greens SUGGEST a communal mentality led by elitists.  The environmental movement is but one of many "back door" attempts to acquire this religion of man by the control of man.  What better way to control man than thru the environment man abodes in???  Environmentalism = Smoke Screen!

Answer 5

I'm not a Green because I put a couple of conditions on the proposed solutions that they don't. To be acceptable any solution must: end global warming by ending the dumping of 4 billion years of stored energy and CO2 into the ecosystem; Not involve the death of 5 or more billion people or their reduction to subsistence levels without hope for improvement even by "benign neglect"; not require the end of freedom on the planet or of technological civilization.

I know of only one solution to these requirements that meets all these requirements, Solar Power Satellites, beaming power to earth without changing the total balance of energy input to the earth. The electricity made is used to crack water into hydrogen and oxygen which is combined with carbon dioxide extracted from the air to form methane to feed our natural gas systems and methanol to run our transportation systems. I'm sorry, but I know of no immediate solution to our current problems. Had we started when SPS were first proposed we could have had 2 or more in operation now and be able to change over relatively easily. Because not all the research necessary was done, it would still take nearly 20 years to get the first full size prototype in operation.

I expect this will be a long and deep recession...

As far as the article goes, it just shows how bureaucratic our government has become.

Answer 6

Fortunately this particular piece of idocy will get resolved in a few months.  Look, I hate to get political, but this isn't coing from environmentalists--its a ploy by the Bush administration.

The Bureau of Land Management is one of the favorite places Bush has put his political appointees--many of them basically work for the coal industry, which has been lobbying to stop solar, nuclear, and wind technology.

Doing an environmental immpact study is a fine idea--but it's not a reason to slow development of alternative energy.  I doubt that any legitimate environmentalists would disagree.

Answer 7

The American South could easily compete with Brazil and Caribbean countries in the production of cheap cheap ethynol, by the growing of sugar cane.  The problem is the same government that will not allow the growing of industrial hemp also is working to keep America from again growing sugar cane. Southern sugar cane would quickly knock out the profit of growing so much corn, thus politicians have no backbone to support an industry that no longer exists (sugar cane production) as opposed to one with huge political clout (corn farming).  We also have entangling trade agreements that practically guarantee other countries that we will limit our sugar cane production.

We could EASILY do as Brazil has done, by simply pushing for the return of the American economy to use of sugar cane.

Answer 8

How about "Conserve your way out of it".  Remember, waste not, want not.

Answer 9

Government-dictated preference for corn-based ethanol and other biofuels is causing massive land overuse, soaring food prices, and increased hunger in the poorest places. A single SUV tank of ethanol-based gasoline burns enough food to feed a starving African for a year.