Definitely "No" on government subsidies. "Subsidies" just mean more taxes, and since we'll end up paying for the cost of exploration/development one way or another, I'd prefer to wait until I can actually use this new power source. I really don't want to pay (through taxes) for pie-in-the-sky, never-gonna-work-reliably-but-if-the-government -will-give-us-funding-we'll-be-happy-to-keep-playing -with-it "green solutions".
They seriously need to pursue wind power and the stupid environmentalist need to SHUT UP about the bats and birds that are stupid enough to fly into them.
I live in an area that wind is actively pursued as a power source, but the blood environmentalist keep complaining and the whole "not in my backyard crowd" keep trying to get them shut down.
solar and wind are very practical. What people need to realize is that there's no one singular replacement for fossil fuel. for wind or solar to work, each city/household will need to have their own generating system. and unless we can make batteries to store it all, we'll need backups to the backups.
In addition to solar and wind, i think they need to research some sort of storage. because that's the fatal weakness even of fossil fuels, you gotta use the energy as it's generated and can't store it.
they also need to work on more and more stuff being more and more efficient in the energy it uses.
And what works for one part of the country won't work for another. Wave power, for example, won't work in Kansas, but geothermal sure would in wyoming/montana.
solar will work better in the south than it will in the north, and wind works great here in the planes and on the coasts but won't work so well in other places.
For ethanol, we need to get away from corn and look into other sources. Such as lawn waste or garbage. We could even mine our landfills and use the methane from decomposing trash to make power
There is no one singular fix. It'll take multiple fixes, suited to the appropriate environment to replace the fossil fuels.
In addition, we need rules/laws that allows consumers to sell their excess self-generated energy back to the grid. Only a few states allow that.
so if I put in a 5000 dollar personal wind generator and only use 3/4 of the power generated, i can sell the 1/4 back to the city for someoen else to use, thus allowing myh investment to eventually pay for itself
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 04:49 am (UTC)-will-give-us-funding-we'll-be-happy-to-keep-playing -with-it "green solutions".
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 02:02 pm (UTC)I live in an area that wind is actively pursued as a power source, but the blood environmentalist keep complaining and the whole "not in my backyard crowd" keep trying to get them shut down.
*sigh*
no subject
Date: 2008-08-16 04:37 pm (UTC)In addition to solar and wind, i think they need to research some sort of storage. because that's the fatal weakness even of fossil fuels, you gotta use the energy as it's generated and can't store it.
they also need to work on more and more stuff being more and more efficient in the energy it uses.
And what works for one part of the country won't work for another. Wave power, for example, won't work in Kansas, but geothermal sure would in wyoming/montana.
solar will work better in the south than it will in the north, and wind works great here in the planes and on the coasts but won't work so well in other places.
For ethanol, we need to get away from corn and look into other sources. Such as lawn waste or garbage. We could even mine our landfills and use the methane from decomposing trash to make power
There is no one singular fix. It'll take multiple fixes, suited to the appropriate environment to replace the fossil fuels.
In addition, we need rules/laws that allows consumers to sell their excess self-generated energy back to the grid. Only a few states allow that.
so if I put in a 5000 dollar personal wind generator and only use 3/4 of the power generated, i can sell the 1/4 back to the city for someoen else to use, thus allowing myh investment to eventually pay for itself