Well, we're on the same page there at least. I'm glad our federal govt. has the foresight to at least give tax breaks for hybrids. That is a step in the right direction.
In the long run, of course, economics and technological advancements will determine how fast alt.energy is adapted. The problem alt.energy has and has faced for years, is the fact that it is at a competitive disadvantage in the marketplace. If the true costs per gallon of gasoline were factored into the price the American consumer pays at the pump, like tax breaks for exploration and billions in subsidies for military protection of the oil supplies each year, gasoline would probably be twice as expensive. In that sort of world, alternatives like electric cars and ethanol or biodiesel would be a lot more appealing to the cost concious consumer.
On the dwelling side of the energy picture, alternatives such as wind/solar, geothermal, etc. would be in much more attractive to consumers if things such as nuclear weren't so heavily subsidized. I really don't have much of a problem with nuclear. It has proven safe for decades since Chernobyl. Some of the new pebble reactor designs are far safer and seem interesting and might be worth exploring. But, because we subsidize nuclear and oil, we're putting alternatives at a disadvantage. It's just basic economics.
The main thing that has changed in recent years is the fact that renewables, especially wind, have come so far down in price, that even with the unfair marketplace, they are starting to flourish. |
