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: Katelew who wrote (252655)	12/30/2007 3:39:08 PM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Good response. Subsidies will be necessary for development of alternate energy supplies. That said - there is no ROI yet - unless there is a huge subsidy. Now - I think a tax of some sort on foreign oil would do the trick (trade laws may be problemmatic with this). Specifically the cost of oil should include the military cost associated with its supply. Now that would raise prices for the consumer - many of which cannot afford it. These people would have to be protected somehow. Also, other taxes would have to be lowered to balance the economic impact. Then with higher energy prices - the market could determine which alternates advance. Bob

To: Katelew who wrote (252655)	12/30/2007 3:53:49 PM
From: bentway	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Our energy producers and their bought pols are hooked on the perpetual consumption model of energy production, where they burn something and charge us for the energy produced. Renewable energy, once paid for, is basically free. Photovolatic cells can and are being installed by individuals all over the country. There's a long period of paying for the installation, but after that the energy is free. Wind power needs a little more maintenance, but nothing compared to a power plant. Dinosaurs like Bob and Nadine will just have to die off.