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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (36056)	12/5/2012 1:29:23 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

Why "should" both coal and oil decline? One of the problems with burning coal and oil for energy is that externalities are not allocated to the producer. So the business burns the fuel but the benefit provided by the emitted CO2 to the wider community is not measured and rewarded. Coal and oil burners should be given tax credits to recognize their wider contribution to the community thanks to the CO2 production, which individual farmers have to pay for themselves to enhance growth in their greenhouses. If energy supplies switched to nuclear reactors, there would be no CO2 produced, thereby causing economic loss to agriculturalists, and possible increased risk from a return to glaciation. The energy businesses might be more profitable using nuclear so unless they are given incentives to stick with carbon combustion, they could well abandon it. Energy independence is of no particular benefit. The USA can make iPhones and Qualcomm chips and places with cheap carbon sources could produce electricity to provide CO2 and aluminum [among other things]. It's a globalized world and "independence" doesn't mean much. Politicians love to go on about energy independence and they have done for 40 years [each president pontificates about it, all to no avail, though shale oil has given a new lease of life to USA production - while oil prices are high]. NZ produces milk,sheep and a nice holiday location. USA produces iPhones, Windows 7, Oracle, Qualcomm, Google and what have you [vast Cyberspace value]. China produces Made in China. Japan produces electronics, cars and the like. Africa produces coffee and gives Bono something to do. London does financial this and that. Oz provides mining production. Independence isn't much use for its own sake. There is no need for governments, aka taxpayers, to fund swanky new noocular reactors. BP used to invest in fusion reactors [maybe still do]. They didn't need government money to do it [though perhaps they were given some funding for all I know, on reflection]. If General Electric wants to invent thorium reactors, leave the shareholders to get on with it. I don't want to fund them. Mqurice