An Inconvenient Electric Bill - Page 17 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-28-2007, 06:59 PM   #241
Jesus Online
 
Angela Harlem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: a glass castle
Posts: 30,163
Local Time: 09:44 AM
No, DrTeeth (the scientist from the Netherlands), that problem was licked a long time ago.
__________________

__________________
<a href=http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v196/angelaharlem/thPaul_Roos28.jpg target=_blank>http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...aul_Roos28.jpg</a>
Angela Harlem is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:01 PM   #242
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 11:44 PM

Sorry my mistake, it was in fact licked a long time ago. Just like in New Orleans.
__________________

__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:25 PM   #243
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Angela Harlem
geez, where to start. have we had the denial that global warming is a problem yet? the comment that canada should appreciate global warming, cause, you know it snows there and shit, the apparent basing of entire viewpoints on an article, the fighting of common sense... then there's the entire politicising of the issue. i wish everyone could forget fucking al gore for just a minute, but no, we have to look local and argue local. god i can't believe i am referencing paul mccartney... ugh. anyway. in short, what worries me and leaves me utterly dumbfounded is that people firstly deny it's existence and secondly are not in a screaming hurry to fix it. how do you get to complacence on these kinds of things?


and what it really comes down to is that people don't want to be told to change their lifestyles.

because it's inconvenient. hence ...
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:29 PM   #244
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:44 PM
oh, and for the political part, if this is the best Drudge can do, the republicans are totally fucked in 2008.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-28-2007, 07:46 PM   #245
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
LyricalDrug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: SF Bay Area, California, USA
Posts: 3,212
Local Time: 03:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by randhail
What I would love to see is politicians stand up and decree that within 10 or 20 years that this country needs to be off or significantly on the way to being off a petroleum based economy. This is a country that was hell bent on being the first on the moon and the goal was achieved within 10 years. Maybe I'm being overly patriotic, optimistic or whatever, but I believe that this country is capable of kicking the oil habit - if we just made it a national priority. We claim to have the best this and that and the best science and ingenuity in the world - lets prove it! or we could just play in the sandbox in the middle east for who knows how long.
I think Hillary Clinton hears you loud and clear, right down to the US space program analogy. Here's a snippet of an email she sent to supporters this morning:

"Yesterday, in my latest HillCast, I described a plan for an Apollo-like effort to make clean, alternative energy the energy of America. This plan would create a strategic energy fund to invest in developing and deploying clean and alternative energy -- home grown energy.

We can create the fund without new taxes on Americans by asking the oil companies to "Play or Pay": either they invest in alternative energy themselves, or they pay a portion of their windfall profits earned from the spike in oil prices into the strategic energy fund. We estimate that the fund will have close to $50 billion to invest in America's new energy future over the next 10 years.

My bill would also repeal oil company subsidies they don't need and reward families and businesses for increasing energy efficiency."
__________________
LyricalDrug is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:08 PM   #246
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 11:44 PM
In Germany our electricity providers start to invest in renewable energies large scale because it becomes really competitive.

So you see, Green is no monster attacking the defenceless big business.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:29 PM   #247
Refugee
 
Bluer White's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maine
Posts: 1,886
Local Time: 05:44 PM
Quote:
We can create the fund without new taxes on Americans by asking the oil companies to "Play or Pay": either they invest in alternative energy themselves, or they pay a portion of their windfall profits earned from the spike in oil prices into the strategic energy fund. We estimate that the fund will have close to $50 billion to invest in America's new energy future over the next 10 years.
Won't this result in increased prices at the pump? Does it really matter if Hillary's plan is an "official" tax or a quasi-tax? Don't we hear every single winter about seniors choosing between buying their meds or heating their home?

I'm waiting for the "strategic funds" Hillary has proposed for other industries with higher profit margins than big oil, like finance and biotech. If we are going to regulate profits in one industry, why not them all, especially the highest margin ones?
__________________
Bluer White is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:43 PM   #248
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bluer White


Won't this result in increased prices at the pump? Does it really matter if Hillary's plan is an "official" tax or a quasi-tax? Don't we hear every single winter about seniors choosing between buying their meds or heating their home?



i'm a big fan of a gas tax.

it would solve SO many problems.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:52 PM   #249
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,296
Local Time: 05:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bluer White


Won't this result in increased prices at the pump?
Given that almost the whole world pays considerably more for gas than you do, I can't understand why Americans constantly complain about prices at the gas pump.
__________________
anitram is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 08:58 PM   #250
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 11:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Bluer White


Won't this result in increased prices at the pump? Does it really matter if Hillary's plan is an "official" tax or a quasi-tax? Don't we hear every single winter about seniors choosing between buying their meds or heating their home?

I'm waiting for the "strategic funds" Hillary has proposed for other industries with higher profit margins than big oil, like finance and biotech. If we are going to regulate profits in one industry, why not them all, especially the highest margin ones?
Well, they are doing quite well, and as she wrote, get subsidised as well.
So you are already paying for your oil companies.

And with the increasing market share of alternative energy producers and suppliers, which creates jobs, they will get into a competition which will decrease the price rather than raise it.

Quote:
Originally posted by anitram


Given that almost the whole world pays considerably more for gas than you do, I can't understand why Americans constantly complain about prices at the gas pump.
They've never been to Europe
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 02-28-2007, 09:00 PM   #251
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 06:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i'm a big fan of a gas tax.

it would solve SO many problems.
Yes, just like the extensive tax breaks given to the telcos to bring fiber optic internet connections to every home back in the early 1990s....

...So why am I forced to use a slow DSL connection in 2007?

And that comes to my point. New taxes aren't going to be the world's savior, because there's absolutely no guarantee that any of the money will be used as intended (and, knowing Congress' poor record of keeping anybody accountable at all, I fully expect such money to be wasted as soon as it arrives). After all, we were funding the Spanish-American War for over 100 years through a gas tax, and look where that got us? (Heh....)

Personally, I'd rather see Big Oil go the way of the Dodo and the telegraph, rather than giving them an incentive to continue their corrupt business model well into the 22nd century, but with a new product. And, frankly, the U.S. government can achieve this goal through targeted legislation, calling for x% of all cars to start using ethanol, hydrogen fuel, or whatever by a certain date and creating incentives to build the appropriate fuel infrastructure/pumps at a national level. That alone could probably lead to increased investment and venture capital into the companies that would create this technology in the private sector, and the shareholders would certainly make sure that they spend their investment as intended, because it will be Chapter 11 for them otherwise when all the investors pull out.

(And it's not as if there isn't a precedent for this. Had it not been for targeted government legislation in the 1970s, we'd all still be driving 8 mpg clunkers.)

The trouble is that Bush has never been interested in any of this, and nobody--including the Democratic Party--has ever been serious enough about discussing it. As far as I'm concerned, a "gas tax" is a futile non-starter, because, not only would the money be wasted like the Universal Service Fund currently is, but the public opposition to such a gas tax would be so fierce as to cause the party in power to be immediately removed from power in the next election.

We're better off evolving towards the 22nd century through targeted goals and incentives, rather than punishments.
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 03-01-2007, 12:25 AM   #252
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Quote:
Again it's short sighted to think that by shifting technologies is damaging to the economy. When we shifted from typewriters to computers, we killed the typewriter industry and hurt the paper industry, when we shifted from film to digital cameras, we killed the film camera industry. There were some people who suffered economically but overall people are better off in the long run. There are companies and countries out there that will make billions off new energy technologies whether it be solar panels, innovative water heating methods or improved insulation in homes.
False analogy; in the case of typewriters and digital cameras the technology was developed and marketed to consumers without government programs forcing people to dump their old alternatives; so far there hasn't been any solutions that outcompete traditional forms in the marketplace and those that do can be greatly lacking (for instance the energy involved in making a Prius means that over the life of the car it exeeds the average hydrocarbon burning one in net carbon emissions.

If a consortium developed a zero emission power source that was cheaper than current ones or a means to make current ones zero emission that was economically viable (in light of lawsuits due to carbon emissions and that liability) then it would be adopted. Spending hundreds of billions of dollars if not trillions forcing it to happen isn't the same.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-01-2007, 12:40 AM   #253
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer


If a consortium developed a zero emission power source that was cheaper than current ones or a means to make current ones zero emission that was economically viable (in light of lawsuits due to carbon emissions and that liability) then it would be adopted.
Not necessarily. There are many other factors involved. There are some sources that may have slightly bigger initial cost, but substantial long run benefits, but get ignored due to short sightedness. There are other people's profits. There's the comfort level of switching over. And there's the pure status quo of "if it ain't broke then don't fix it".

And as you can see, many don't think it's broke.
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 03-01-2007, 12:42 AM   #254
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:44 AM
Outlay falls under cheaper.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 03-01-2007, 01:31 AM   #255
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 04:44 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Outlay falls under cheaper.
I understand that.

Here's an example. There's a town here in west TX. 5 years ago a company proposed a swith to wind power. The whole town could be powered. Not one household would have to change a thing. The cost was nothing, and the town wanted it. Well the utility company didn't, so in working with the local government they passed laws that restricted the building of these turbines, i.e. height restrictions and what not. So the local utility company halted progress due to their loss of profits. It wasn't a matter of having inferior power source or cost.

That was 5 years ago, they have since lost a law suit and the turbines are now being brought in.
__________________

__________________
BVS is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com