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 : The Palestinian Hoax -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: AK2004 who wrote (985)	7/9/2002 5:23:08 AM
From: Cogito	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3467

>>now let us be realistic, the infrastructure that you are talking about would be extremely expensive. When someone would try to establish such an infrastructure during political instability and economic downturn then the likelihood of success is zero. Hydrogen cells or any other fuel cells no matter how attractive they may be should not be considered as a solution for a current crisis. A more effective approach is to have stricter requirements on fuel efficiency of engines and the development of alternative sources of oil. Fuel cells are for the future but we have a problem right now<< Albert - I agree with your individual points, but not your conclusion. As you say, we have a problem right now. That's one reason why drilling in Alaska is a poor solution, since oil would not start flowing for at least ten years. I don't know if our current energy situation could be described as a crisis, but it will become a crisis if we don't start figuring out how to deal with it in the long term. We need a long term solution, and that's what I'm talking about. Yes, a hydrogen distribution infrastructure would be expensive, and private companies aren't going to take the risk of building it. That's exactly why the government would need to step in and at least partially subsidize it. The whole idea here is for the government to act decisively, with urgency, and with the understanding that providing for our nation's energy needs is as important as providing for our security needs. In fact, the two are inextricably connected. Going to the moon was expensive. Some people considered it to be an unrealistic goal. The United States was well behind the Soviet Union in the space race by 1961. The Soviets had put the first man in space, and the first artificial satellite into orbit. I'm sure they didn't think we'd be able to overtake them and make it to the moon first. But we did. We did it because we made a national commitment and we dedicated the necessary resources to the task. You are absolutely correct that we also need to have stricter fuel efficiency requirements on cars and trucks. We also need to develop alternative fuels. Money spent on oil exploration and development would be better spent in building ethanol plants or something like that. These efforts must not be afterthoughts in our energy policy. They must be our primary focus, for they are the only permanent solution to the problem. - Allen