Alternative Fuels - Hope for the Future

Yes, alternative sources of energy brings a bright future and potential for the coming years. Although at this moment, in my honest opinion, crude oil is still the cheapest and most readily harnessed fuel that can be used. But renewable energy sources and other alternatives are really trying to develop and improve their efficiency as fuel and energy source. Especially during this times, the Green Revolution is becoming popular and sustainable development has been a topic globally. Environmentally sound and friendly alternatives for energy and fuels are really increasing in studies. I think that the best bets for these alternative energy and fuels will be the Solar, Wind and Geothermal sources. I think there are recent developments regarding harnessing the power of the sun. In our country, we have a nice growth potential for harnessing geothermal energy. Investments should really be focused on such things to help ease the burden to our environment and also add up to provide for the human race's demand for fuels and energy.

I would imagine that everyone agrees with you on this...except the oil companies. They have the most to lose by alternative energy. They just come up with ways to use more oil. Ethanol uses more oil than just straight gas. That was a great idea that the oil companies came up with. First you have to grow the corn etc...It takes tractors and trucks and fertilizers and all that good stuff. (not to mention it destroys the soil) Then it takes oil to process the grain to turn it into ethanol. And of course it is less efficient than plain gas so we use lots more fuel to travel the same distance...Brilliant! Sell MO OIL make MO Money!!! Everyone here in the states makes it seem like it costs way too much to use alternative energy sources. Funny...other smaller countries than ours seem to be able to afford to do this. Even individuals seem to be able to do solar and even sell power back to the power company. This has been so efficient that many cities and counties have made it illegal now to do it here in the states...Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Most Housing areas have deed restrictions against free standing solar power units here in my area of FL. Yeah, Fl, the one place where solar and wind would be great to use for power. They don't even recycle at their apt. complexes...

More money than is already invested with minimal results? More leniency granted for crimes against nature (what they call them when oil and gas companies kill birds or tear up lands) than what are already granted? More promoting of government sponsorship and more regulations to ensure that the marketplace doesn't create (read: control) the production of green energy? Why not? It's worked great thus far. Like everything else the government puts money into with extremely poor results, let's not attempt to reevaluate the approach. Let's just double down--hell, quadruple down--on the spending! It's four our future, after all.

I'll never understand this. Ok... so you have a cheap form of energy. Without any direct reason, you are going to pay people to make an expensive form of energy. AND THEN.... when they make the expensive form of energy, you are going to PAY THEM FOR IT. How does this make sense to you? Worse, the people who are paying the money, are poor. And the people getting paid, are rich. So you are going to take money from poor people, to pay rich people, to make something the poor people have to pay the rich to get. HOW DOES THIS MAKE SENSE?!?!? Please, you explain this to me. You are like an inverse Robyn hood, only with the force of the baron. Lets steal from the poor, to pay the rich, and use the government to do it. GAH!!)!!!@!%!@*$& What is wrong with you? EXPLAIN!?!?!?

No, if you want to get pummelled, you need to drag out nuclear energy as the most important short term solution to the world's energy. Germany is leading an anti-nuclear agenda by taking their plants off-line and basically regressing in wasteful energy practices. Fear is starting to drive polcy again. Even nuclear energy is a short term fix, but in producing electricity without using up coal and oil resources (and doing so without as much environmental impact if done correctly), we could be giving ourselves a good 50 year window to find the next, better energy source. We also could be developing healthier "third world" communities by delivering nuclear energy solutions. But you might get attacked for saying such things so you probably shouldn't. I know because I said this all 30 years ago and we're still in the same boat only worse off because we wasted the last 30 years not being as supportive of alternate energy as we should have been. We likely won't have a good concensus in favor of replacing oil dependency until the oil is all gone. Short-term thinking is terrible, but common, politics. My only positive spin on the future is that I'll likely be gone before we completely run out of oil and turn into a raving anarchic mess. But that's just my ever-optimistic side coming out. Good luck with your argument.