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.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (38949)	6/27/2011 5:21:09 PM
From: aladin	Respond to of 46821

Frank, Without on demand generation capacity from something like gas turbines - renewables are not a reasonable answer - they will come with rolling brown outs. I saw your posting within a minute or two of a news release on the gushers, but my response was more to the NYT article than to your original post. The NYT has been mostly attacking shale over potential pollution issues and has been using very questionable studies to advance its position. If carbon is bad and our current methodology is coal - almost anything is better and that message gets lost. Building and recycling batteries creates pollution. Charging them has a cost. Is it as bad as gasoline - I doubt it, but when new solutions are attacked - there is a message of equivalency and no realistic comparison. For example google 'hydropower and methane'. Essentially we should all live in caves if you take this too far. I agree with your view 'smart grid', but I extend that to the ecology folks. As I said we should be pushing a practical multi faceted approach that pushes nuclear, wind, hydro, coal to diesel, bio diesel, ethanol, ngv's, ev's and fuel cells. There is no magic and no single answer. But today's idiotic policies create environments where we make ethanol from food by burning coal. John

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (38949)	7/2/2011 7:35:11 PM
From: axial	Respond to of 46821

'John E. Olson, an energy market analyst at Houston Energy Partners, says he believes shale companies have been aggressively booking their reserve estimates and playing down costs to make themselves appear more profitable. Mr. Olson, who is famous for having been fired from Merrill Lynch in 1998 for refusing to recommend Enron stocks, compared the accounting practices of shale gas companies and the hype surrounding the industry to what he saw at Enron. Of the S.E.C. rule change, Mr. Olson said: “Welcome back to Alice in Wonderland.”' S.E.C. Shift Leads to Worries of Overestimation of Reserves More: nytimes.com [Yet another case where relaxation (or absence) of regulation can have disastrous consequences] Jim