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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (51282)	3/1/2008 10:00:08 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 543262

How about the national highway system then? That was a hugely subsidized enterprise that started in the mid 50's and was more or less complete by the late 60's. That took a lot of infrastructure. How about our vast industrial refit for WWII? How about the switch from whale oil to kerosene? That involved infrastructure, and took a remarkably short time. And as an added plus, it's also about energy. Have you read the book the Black Swan? You might enjoy it.

To: Bearcatbob who wrote (51282)	3/1/2008 10:37:12 PM
From: Cogito	Respond to of 543262

>>Mme - you need to consider the billions of dollars of infrastructure that needs to be replaced. It is not simply a technological issue. It is also political. The technology of nuclear power exists today to make a huge difference. It would take decades to implement it even if the decision was made tomorrow to start. The man on the moon exercise and the Manhattan project were focused on singular events. Replacing the entire worlds energy infrastructure is a staggering thought. Again - the demographics of the world must be considered. There are billions out there and a few hundred million here. There is a major distinction between technology and world wide implementation.<< Bob - Wait, so the politicians who are talking about taking grand steps toward greater reliance on renewable energy sources like wind and solar are wrong because it would take political will to make it happen? I'm not sure I follow that logic. Building hundreds of new nuclear plants would take a lot of political will, too. Why not use that will to take a few steps beyond that? Here are a couple of ideas, just as examples. Why not build just a few new nuclear power plants, and also put solar panels and/or wind turbines on top of at least half the buildings in the country? Why not work our little innovative tails off finding ways to build far more useful electric or hybrid vehicles? And who here is talking about replacing the entire world's energy infrastructure? I'm fairly certain that we all understand that we in the US can only control what goes on here. - Allen