Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well Wapasha all these alternative energy sources require much invested expense. No way around that and I'm a pragmatic realist also, but admittedly no expert research scientist in this process, but it makes 'reasonable' sense to let the development go forward UNTIL it shows that process is too expensive. The marketplace will ultimately make that decision.
I'm not talking about the research costs, I'm speaking to the practical applications cost. From what i have read, it already looks like this process will be fundamentally impractical, from an economic standpoint. The only bright side is we might gain insight into a different method of energy, but this one looks like a loser.
Hydrogen fuel cells sound like they might have a break thru soon, we will have to see what the practical costs are. If it costs me ten times as much to drive as my gas powered car, then it will be economically impractical.
On the other hand, with the natural gas boom, why aren't we looking into powering our cars with methanol?
You vastly over reach. The big ones with a a couple of exceptions are capital project with little risk of a significant loss.
The small ones are speculative. A payoff by one or two could make the whole deal a big winner. You need to come back and recheck the list in 5 years or so.
Solyndra actually had a product that could well have won in a world with a level playing field. The technology was pretty good. The playing field however was not level.
I am surprised that you are not upset by the sinking of an American Corporation by Chinese dumping and subsidies. That is OK with you?
It isn't I who has overreached here, it's the federal government who should not been involved as it was in the alleged "free market" in the first place and especially with high-risk loans in speculative technology.
As to your last question in point, it's not directly on-topic with the OP, but one cannot criticize the Chinese for what you said without noting that Obozo is their enabler of sorts. If we weren't beholding to them over the vast debt load of ours they've assumed, don't you not think the relationship would be MUCH different now? And in the midst of this, his supposed jobs czar is and has been in China creating new Chinese companies there, with new Chnese employees that benefit only China. He does very little in his position to create jobs HERE. I'm referring, of course, to Jeff Emmelt.
I thni one onyl has to look at by far the biggest user of coal ;China and their polutio problems and just how much tehy are spending o clean oil reserch. They elad the world in clean oil research ebcause they need standards much higher than just our clean coal reserch has come up with. IMO coal inductry missed the boat in fighting clean oil converstion in the past badly.
It isn't I who has overreached here, it's the federal government who should not been involved as it was in the alleged "free market" in the first place and especially with high-risk loans in speculative technology.
As to your last question in point, it's not directly on-topic with the OP, but one cannot criticize the Chinese for what you said without noting that Obozo is their enabler of sorts. If we weren't beholding to them over the vast debt load of ours they've assumed, don't you not think the relationship would be MUCH different now? And in the midst of this, his supposed jobs czar is and has been in China creating new Chinese companies there, with new Chnese employees that benefit only China. He does very little in his position to create jobs HERE. I'm referring, of course, to Jeff Emmelt.
I see no reason why spending a percent or two of the federal budget on speculative developments is a bad idea. Hell we can fund it from the agricultural or oil subsidies.
The Chinese are in no position to dictate anything to the USA. That is utter nonsense. They need the USA... and Walmart as their marketing arm.
They sneeze and the US slaps a tariff on their goods. I think we ought to load all of their import with a tariff offsetting their labor costs. Shoul not reward slave labor.
I'm not talking about the research costs, I'm speaking to the practical applications cost. From what i have read, it already looks like this process will be fundamentally impractical, from an economic standpoint. The only bright side is we might gain insight into a different method of energy, but this one looks like a loser.
Hydrogen fuel cells sound like they might have a break thru soon, we will have to see what the practical costs are. If it costs me ten times as much to drive as my gas powered car, then it will be economically impractical.
On the other hand, with the natural gas boom, why aren't we looking into powering our cars with methanol?
The real problem goes outside the various alternate clean fuel methods. This administration in particular and the record of federal government regulatory excess in the marketplace over many recent administrations has created a hostile environment for entreprenurial investors. If that were to change and government GOT OUT OF THE WAY of progress, you'd see more private competition in the marketplace to be the first to bring a good alternative into use. Regulations are necessary, but few and well-enforced only, not what we have now. US Navy subs have been out of the old "diesel boat" business for a long time now having been replaced by on-board nuclear power. A small nuclear fuel cell would be feasible and made safe in cars and trucks, but simply because it had "nuclear" attached to it the federal regulators would be all over any attempt to bring it to market. We have met the enemy and it is OUR OWN GOVERNMENT!
I see no reason why spending a percent or two of the federal budget on speculative developments is a bad idea. Hell we can fund it from the agricultural or oil subsidies.
I've stated in this topic elsewhere that the BAD thing about that is that NOW the government is investing in such by "deficit spending", distributing fiat paper money with only RED INK behind it. The government needs to get back in the black financially and ONLY THEN does it make sense.
Quote:
The Chinese are in no position to dictate anything to the USA. That is utter nonsense. They need the USA... and Walmart as their marketing arm.
"utter nonsense"? What is utter nonsense is failing to recognize the coersive relationship we have enabled and allowed China to have over us. Obozo and every President after him is TOTALLY dependent on China and othe foreign countries for investing in our debt instruments. They are underwriters of our BAD DEBT and as such have us by the short hairs and that's old news to boot![1] The ChiComs
export to many more countries than the US......and no matter what we'll keep allowing them to ship their cheaply-made crap here, because of their "coersive relationship" I just mentioned. Your failure to recognize how she has us over the barrel is shortsighted indeed.
Quote:
They sneeze and the US slaps a tariff on their goods. I think we ought to load all of their import with a tariff offsetting their labor costs. Shoul not reward slave labor.
You vastly over reach. The big ones with a a couple of exceptions are capital project with little risk of a significant loss.
The small ones are speculative. A payoff by one or two could make the whole deal a big winner. You need to come back and recheck the list in 5 years or so.
Solyndra actually had a product that could well have won in a world with a level playing field. The technology was pretty good. The playing field however was not level.
I am surprised that you are not upset by the sinking of an American Corporation by Chinese dumping and subsidies. That is OK with you?
You have to read this article if you have time, it's about Bush's initiative to fund hydrogen technology.
WASHINGTON, DC, February 6, 2003 (ENS) - President George W. Bush promoted his hydrogen fuel initiative today as critics continue to blast the plan as a smokescreen for the administration's rejection of environmentally friendly policies. Conservation groups argued that the United States would be better served if the White House supported available technology to boost fuel efficiency and reduce air pollution, rather than depending on an unproven science.
The president called on Congress to rally behind his initiative, which would provide some $1.2 billion to fund hydrogen fuel cell research over the next five years. The money would fund research into the use of hydrogen fuel cells to power automobiles, as well as studies of how to create, store and transport hydrogen fuel.
The legislation includes support for the presidents' $1.2 billion hydrogen initiative, which aims to make it practical and cost effective for U.S. consumers to use hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles by 2020.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What is utter nonsense is failing to recognize the coersive relationship we have enabled and allowed China to have over us. Obozo and every President after him is TOTALLY dependent on China and othe foreign countries for investing in our debt instruments. They are underwriters of our BAD DEBT and as such have us by the short hairs and that's old news to boot![1] The ChiComs 
...and no matter what we'll keep allowing them to ship their cheaply-made crap here, because of their "coersive relationship" I just mentioned. Your failure to recognize how she has us over the barrel is shortsighted indeed.
Start getting ready to experience a higher unemployment rate here. Try catching up with current day realities first. 
