Understanding the Issues 2008: Energy

Candidate 2's plan is total horse crap and I am puzzled as to why so many in here prefer it. I simply don't see how we can become energy independent with that joke of a plan. All candidate 2 plans to do is keep the status quo.

Candidate 2's plan is total horse crap and I am puzzled as to why so many in here prefer it. I simply don't see how we can become energy independent with that joke of a plan. All candidate 2 plans to do is keep the status quo.


Now, now, now..Saden. We can't go bashing the candidates around here:)

Actually, candidate 1 and 3 are pretty similiar.

Candidate 2's plan is total horse crap and I am puzzled as to why so many in here prefer it. I simply don't see how we can become energy independent with that joke of a plan. All candidate 2 plans to do is keep the status quo.

Because it doesn't involve spending massive amounts of tax dollars or placing unfair financial burdens on the energy industry (25% of all power from renewable sources???).

Because it doesn't involve spending massive amounts of tax dollars or placing unfair financial burdens on the energy industry (25% of all power from renewable sources???).

Energy independence is a lofty goal and we need to think big! If you don't make a large investment and make serious commitment nothing will change (money back guaranteed). Oil and Energy companies will simply keep doing what they are doing which obviously isn't working. I mean, these guys have no real vested interest in doing anything because every three months they have to do a conference call and answer to their investors to tell them what they have made for them not what they have spent on behalf of the nation. I think the government needs to lead the way and candidate 2's plan has no serious provisions in his plan in that regard. It's insulting.

#1 and #3 are very similar, which may tell us who they belong to. ;)

The one point I see missing from all three plans however is oil independence. We DO have massive resources of our own to tap into: ANWR, Utah/Colorado, Wyoming, offshore of Florida and California...enough to last us decades if we'd use only our own reserves. Updating refineries and building new ones of long overdue but impossible thanks to environmental and bureaucratic restrictions.

We do need to research alternatives, but in the meantime we have our own oil that we can use much cheaper without any foreign political strings attached. Of course, it will take us about 10 years before we have any actual fuel from these reserves, but that is all the more reason to begin drilling for it NOW.

There is something to like about all 3, however, the candidate that I would most like to see is the one that says NO MORE OIL. (yes, we all know I am a Bush advocate, but I don't have to like EVERYTHING about his tenure do I?)
It's time to stop using oil 100%, and we need to make a plan to stop it NOW. Corn is my alternative, and no one seems to be making that a priority.
I love the wind and solar energy idea for homes etc...if we put more money towards research in those departments, we could maximize the energy they give us.
All this kind of reminds me of Monsters Inc. They needed screams and they were barely making the energy needs, then they found out that laughter was the better solution. Right now, oil is screams, and corn / solar / wind is laughter. We just have to learn to harness it.

It's time to stop using oil 100%, and we need to make a plan to stop it NOW. Corn is my alternative, and no one seems to be making that a priority.


There are valid reasons why.

Aside from driving food costs through the roof (not only the corn, but a lower supply of feed for animals being raised for beef, chicken, etc will cause all meat prices to skyrocket), read this:

The Oil Drum | Ethanol Fuel is not so Green (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3578)


If you like the idea of breathing in poisonous, flammable cyanide gas, support ethanol.

[The role of ethanol in complex poisonings with ca...[Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol. 2006 Jan-Mar] - PubMed Result (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16708609?dopt=AbstractPlus)

Also, ethanol can't be transported by pipeline like gasoline. Water contamination is a big risk. It will all need to be transported by trucks. There's a huge increase in transportation costs and pollution. This is also crushing ethanol producers' profits because of the high transportation costs. If they're not profiting, they won't make it just to feel better inside.

Ethanol is less efficient than our current fuel. It's not a viable solution.

There are valid reasons why.

Aside from driving food costs through the roof (not only the corn, but a lower supply of feed for animals being raised for beef, chicken, etc will cause all meat prices to skyrocket), read this:

The Oil Drum | Ethanol Fuel is not so Green (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3578)


If you like the idea of breathing in poisonous, flammable cyanide gas, support ethanol.

[The role of ethanol in complex poisonings with ca...[Arch Med Sadowej Kryminol. 2006 Jan-Mar] - PubMed Result (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16708609?dopt=AbstractPlus)

Also, ethanol can't be transported by pipeline like gasoline. Water contamination is a big risk. It will all need to be transported by trucks. There's a huge increase in transportation costs and pollution. This is also crushing ethanol producers' profits because of the high transportation costs. If they're not profiting, they won't make it just to feel better inside.

Ethanol is less efficient than our current fuel. It's not a viable solution.


That's the thing, people, not everyone, think that Ethanol will solve our energy woes, when in fact, as you've pointed out Buster, it's not as effiecient as our current fuel. From what I understand, which is from a pretty reliable source, it costs a helluva lot of money to convert corn to into actual fuel. So the ultimate tradeoff really isn't as feasible as it's being touted.

Clearly you people have not seen the thread about using water as fuel... lol.

I like number one solely for the strict measures to increase fuel efficiency. While I love the idea of alternative fuel sources, we're stuck with oil for the foreseeable future. I'm pissed already that while we can "govern" a car at 130 miles per hour, we couldn't suddenly govern a car at 75 (within the speed limits of most or all states).

Why would that be such a problem? Instantly, less gas is used and miles per gallon goes up.