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.

Strategies & Market Trends : John Pitera's Market Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (11204)	1/8/2009 1:36:16 PM
From: Augustus Gloop	Respond to of 33421

Of course its about national security. As I pointed out - we're currently sending money to countries that aren't our friends. The cost factor will take care of itself provided we have a cohesive plan of attack and stick to it! When energy prices come down we seem to abandon all conservation practices. We went back to building vehicles that got 70's style gas mileage just because oil got cheap after the 1991 war with Iraq. Can you say stupid? We ended up just where we deserved to be. We need to lower our need and utilize our resources HERE! The auto makers are getting exactly what they deserve - they were stupid on the engineering side and they gave away the farm on the union side

To: Jorj X Mckie who wrote (11204)	1/8/2009 1:39:12 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 33421

we need to make our energy independence about national security, not the price of oil. Totally concur, since global oil prices impact EVERY economy, not just the US. As far as the energy policy, I simply want it to be about removing the obstacles to developing and using energy sources other than petroleum. What's you perspective of what those obstacles are? IMO, I think the primary obstacles still revolve around cost/benefit with regard to vehicles. And with regard to electrical generation, insuring that our nation's baseload capacity is not dependent upon fickle wind conditions, or cloudy days. What I really worry about is whether alternatives are as "ready for prime time" as they being hyped to be. We've had an extensive discussion on the Politics of Energy thread about the merits of Lithium batteries over waiting for ultracapacitor technology to advance sufficiently (I'm think I'm leaning toward the latter), before making the big push. Lithium is primarily found in quantity in the Atacama desert of S. America, and China. The US doesn't have particularly large deposits of it. So some question whether we're merely substituting dependence upon imported oil for imported Lithium: pdfdownload.org And don't get me wrong, I really think PHEV technology is the way to go, because people who have a daily commute are the ones most responsible for this country's gasoline consumption (farmers being responsible for diesel). But Lithium batteries degrade in capacity each and every year, whether used or not, whereas ultracapacitors have the promise of long durability and quick recharge. Hawk