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 Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GROUND ZERO™ who wrote (26091)	2/12/2010 1:14:11 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Re: "I agree, why not? When I was in Australia, all the public transportation was running on natural gas, it makes excellent sense..." (I think the 'why not' is that vested business interests - and their captive pols - are out to MAINTAIN their sales by keeping competition away. In this instance, it's the coal and, to a lesser degree, oil and nuclear infrastructure, that do not want to see natural gas expanding into new markets... and certainly don't want to see the loss of their old markets such as electrical utilities....) Re: "even better, why not on hydrogen?" Hydrogen is in many ways even better, but today it costs much more... and nat. gas is likely to stay cheaper for some decades to come. After all, the US is now the world's LARGEST producer (we just moved past Russia last year) and at current rates of use we have OVER a 100 year supply... with the (reasonable assumption) expectation that even more gas will become commercially available in coming years the --- even if we make a big push to increase natural gas use in transportation and in utilities, both places where it is not only CHEAPER then the currently dominant oil and coal but also much much cleaner for the environment --- we will STILL have plenty of home-produced fuel for decades and decades to come....