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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bonds, Currencies, Commodities and Index Futures -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Adams who wrote (2156)	7/26/2001 10:30:30 PM
From: Moominoid	Respond to of 12411

I agree with pretty much eevrything you wrote in that post. David

To: Mark Adams who wrote (2156)	7/31/2001 2:20:01 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12411

Hi Mark, Re: On initial inspection, I suspect drilling for oil/gas is much "cheaper" than converting excess supplies of edible oil sources. You are correct, and the cost of coal is competitive as well. Except if we can get a suitable political answer to nuclear "wastes" and then the fission industry wins hands down. A very interesting, intelligent and ecologically wise view of biomass energy sources was put forth in Peter Huber's "Hard Green". He is of the opinion, and it persuaded me, that the acreage that would be required for a sustainable crop based energy supply in this country would be completely ludicrous. We'd have to plow from coast to coast, at a cost to all natural settings that the Republicans love for virgin steeplechase courses and the Dems love for the fawns and flora. So, scratch that corn-fed car off the list as a possibility. Ain't gonna happen. Or as Joe Nacho of Qworst would say, "this dawg don't hunt." -Ray