Who Pays for Cap and Trade?

Don't know but my guess is less than it would take to drill a well and what you have as a finished product is green energy.

 

I wish that were true.But it isn't

 

Which part is not true?

 

That wind will supply enough energy under any circumstances. It would be nice.

 

A guess...

Yes, this is pretty much the basis that congress is using when making all these laws and spending all this money.

We went through the alternative energy thing in the early 1970's.

People were pitching passive solar energy, wind turbines, water turbines, running diesel engines on recycled food cooking oil...

Nothing came of it then and no doubt nothing will come of it now.

The energy output for these alternative are just too low to be a practical alternative to oil.

But you and congress will advocate spending our Federal tax dollars on it - based on a "guess".

 

Be glad! There are many racist in Georgia, so any "Yankee" input would be a welcome change.

 

You are probably right with todays technology but I have hope that technologies will improve. Imagine wind turbines and/or solar panels on top of every sky scraper. Most major cities could greatly reduce their dependence on fossil fuels. How about paying a farmer to fill his land with turbines instead of paying him not to grow crops? I think there is a lot of hidden potential in this stuff...

 

That's why it failed then and why it won't fail now. Too many negative folks were against it them but more of us see the potential and have hope now so I believe something will come of it.

 

Forcing a change by use force (government and the police state) on a hope is foolishness and completely idiotic.

 

By force I guess you mean the tax... I agree the tax is too soon. I think we should give incentives to switch now and develop the technology better then tax the last few businesses to get them to switch at the end. Kind of like we did with the old tailpipe smoking cars when emission test began.

 

Making a profit in the free market is the incentive to developing technologies that work.

Financial incentives for imaginary future technologies from the government results in technologies that are not cost practical or even workable.

Why do you imagine that some bureaucrat in Washington knows which technologies hold real promise and which do not?

Let the companies that will profit from the research and development of new products create the new technologies and the consuming market who will buy them decide.

 

Well yes, how could I have missed it?

Cost per kilowatt hour produced by a wind turbine is determined by the attitude of negative folks.:laugh:

Nothing at all to do with economics.:laugh:

How do you get through the day?

 

By incentive I meant tax cuts. I thought y'all were in favor of tax cuts.

We should give these companies a good tax incentive to encourage them to switch to green energy.

 

The more people convert the cheaper it will be for each kilowatt hour. The attitudes kept people from converting which kept the price per kilowatt up. I am betting with the bad air cap, more will convert this time which will drive the price per kilowatt down.

 

I knew that some of the folks inhabiting Yankee cities were racists like O'bama and his ex pastor. Are you saying those Yankees moving south are racists? Yankee go home!:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

Tax credits to particular industries is bureaucrats picking winners and losers without the technical knowledge to know which technology will actually work.

Why should my tax dollars go to support some pie in the sky technology because it is the favorite of some politician?

While a possible technology with actual potential is ignored because companies are out chasing tax credits.

 

Physics is physics. There are only so many units of energy to be obtained from so many square feet of sunshine, etc.

Peoples attitudes don't change that.

Did mandated ethonal gas bring down the price of gas - or did it drive up the price of corn and with it the cost of food?

You want to put politicians in charge of things that they know nothing about.

 

No, I'm saying that there are still many racist in the deep South, in states like Georgia, although things have gotten much better over the past 40 years or so.

I know that there are racists in every state, it's just that remembering the horrible treatment blacks received before civil rights, and knowing several people personally who live in Georgia (one of whom is a pastor) and their feeling toward minorities, I would say there is still a long way for states like Georgia to go. Now, I will admit that the majority doesn't hold to these beliefs. The problem is that it is often the racist who really doesn't see himself as he actually is.

 

Kind of a short sighted view isn't it? There was a day when a gallon of gas equaled 3 or 4 miles of travel. As technology improved so did the distance one could travel on that same gallon of gas. As technology improves, so will the amount of power we get from that same square feet of sunshine etc...

 

Necessity is the mother of invention... don't you agree. If we can create necessity we will see advancements in technologies or perhaps a new technology that is right under our noses but no one sees today.

Fossil fuel is a finite resource. If not us, future generations will have to explore alternatives. You don't want to leave future generations a huge debt? Why leave them a brown cloud and a limited supply of fuel? If we are to care about future generations, why don't we care completely instead of selectively caring about pet peeves and being irresponsible about others...?