SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Bald Eagle who wrote (215191)1/6/2002 1:00:54 PM
From: gao seng  Respond to of 769667
 
Ok, I read into the post that Saudi was supporting terrorism, and thus our support of Saudi could be seen as supporting terrorism. Sorry.

I do not buy that Cheney and Bush are pro Saudi and anti-American when it comes to oil. One example, Cheney, while at Haliburton, was the main reason for the pipeline that allows Russia to be a threat to the oligarchy of OPEC.

Drilling for more domestic oil would also be bad for OPEC. And, you do not see Cheney and Bush against that. They are in favor of that.

There is no reason for conservation, IMO. Oil is abundant.

As for alternative sources of energy, have you seen the latest? Putting solar panels on the moon and microwaving the electricity collected there to Earth? I think something like this could be done well before oil supplies start running out.



To: Bald Eagle who wrote (215191)1/6/2002 1:06:34 PM
From: PROLIFE  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
<<I would like to see our government support oil conservation(by financial incentives to consumers etc.)>

I don't think that is going to work. You saw what happened when gov't. regs forced auto makers to make autos smaller and smaller for better mileage, etc; people just changed gears and started driving more extended cab pick-ups and Suburbans, which then gave way to the SUV craze.