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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michael Watkins who wrote (7111)	10/23/2001 6:16:00 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 281500

Yes, that is the real conflict, that the developing world which also needs the cheapest energy to develope also produces much of that energy. For us, the wealthy ones, it doesn't really,really matter if it is $10 or $60 (well, USA and transportation??) but for many developing nations it is disaster, fields without irrigation, meat without refrigation, milk without pasteurazation (??) etc,etc... That is why, the way I understand it, the goal is now something around $30, some incentives for more efficent use of energy, and maybe sometimes $50 to 70?? Ilmarinen Which obviously will make a lot of "alternative sources" competetive, for those with the technology or cheap labor to use them. But in all of investments of capital there has to be a common view on future costs, and that is were the "$15 producers" come in, solidarity like in Poland??