Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (136956)	5/18/2001 4:15:27 PM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579887

Ted, Here is an article by Jimmy Carter -- an elected president -- that debunks the Bush theory that conservation does not work. Of course Bush doesn't let any nasty facts get in the way of his theories. Conservation is for wimps and the American way of life is blessed. So God likes the Bush plan, according to Bush. Of course the oil, gas and mining companies think Bush is pretty nifty too. For only a $100 million investment they will make Billions. washingtonpost.com Misinformation and Scare Tactics By Jimmy Carter Thursday, May 17, 2001; Page A23 Official statistics published by the departments of energy and labor reveal the facts: Since I signed the final energy bills in 1980, America's gross national product has increased by 90 percent, while total energy consumption went up only 26 percent. Our emphasis on coal and other sources of energy and improved efficiency has limited petroleum consumption to an increase of only 12 percent. During this time, non-energy prices have risen 2 1/2 times as much as energy prices, and gasoline prices have actually declined by 41 percent, in real terms and even including the temporary surge in the past two years.

To: tejek who wrote (136956)	5/18/2001 9:29:51 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579887

Dear Ted: I am conserving. Each vehicle I buy gets better mileage than the last one. The 3 or 4 mpg you lose due to having a 4WD system than a 2WD one is not worth it in 99.99% of the situations. I use CF bulbs rather than incadescants. I use less energy during the heating season and cooling seasons. My home consumption averages less than 500W. I average 24-26 mpg in my one vehicle. But you can't cut energy usage by 1/2 without some extreme lifestyle changes. Everyone would have to use mass transit even if it means that they give up their nice homes and move to compact super high rise apartments in the city. All of the security lights would need to be shut off. And that has to include all business and government. And no aircraft because that burns energy too fast. I do not want to live like that because some nitwit says we can conserve our way out. Does that mean I do not want conservation done? No, but it is not a magic bullet. It can get us some of the way there. I would use nuclear power and expanded coal use (especially CHP like is done in Menomonee Valley in Milwaukee). NG power is being overbuilt. NG should be used for heating and industrial uses only. Hybirds should be in all types of vehicles (electric power only if usable). Fusion research should be pushed as it would make all other forms unnecessary long term (convert water to H2 & O2, and use LiH2 to replace oil, and NG as fuels). Expanding electric power transmission has three benefits, one is to move power from where its abundant to where is missing (add reliability), the second is to allow time zone combining to reduce the need for as much capacity (average peaks occuring at different times to a lower peak and slower demand volatility), and lastly to place power plants remotely from certain environmentally sensitive areas. All three sections are required to solve the long term problems. California tried the conserve our way out environment only (the BANANA and NIMBY) approach and it has failed. Now they want us to pay for their folly. A resounding NO! Pete