Energy Policy (1 Viewer)

[ALiberalModerate]

Just curious what people though as I am sure that Hurricane Katrina and the resulting high energy costs are going to spark a lot of debate in Washington on this subject.

 

[Navy Pride]

Not enough options on your poll.............All of the above and research to provide alternate sources of energy such as hydrogen........

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Not enough options on your poll.............All of the above and research to provide alternate sources of energy such as hydrogen........

What I am saying is that if you have 100 dollars to spend on an energy policy, should more of that money be spent on energy efficency and conservation efforts or more on exploration?

 

[Navy Pride]

What I am saying is that if you have 100 dollars to spend on an energy policy, should more of that money be spent on energy efficency and conservation efforts or more on exploration?

With all respect that is not what you said..Here is what you said:


[QUOTE--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just curious what people though as I am sure that Hurricane Katrina and the resulting high energy costs are going to spark a lot of debate in Washington on this subject.][/QUOTE]

 

[ALiberalModerate]

With all respect that is not what you said..Here is what you said:

Ok, but that is what I was thinking.:lol:

 

[MiamiFlorida]

Just curious what people though as I am sure that Hurricane Katrina and the resulting high energy costs are going to spark a lot of debate in Washington on this subject.

i think you should have a third polling option: Alternative Energy

 

[ALiberalModerate]

I think you should have a third polling option: Alternative Energy

I thought about that, but Alternative Energy is not a viable option without being used in conjunction with Conservation or increased Exploration.

So basically, any energy policy would have to be primarily based in Conservation or increased Exploration.

 

[Stinger]

I thought about that, but Alternative Energy is not a viable option without being used in conjunction with Conservation or increased Exploration.

So basically, any energy policy would have to be primarily based in Conservation or increased Exploration.

Nuclear is very viable, supplies the vast majority of electricity in France and without it we will never develope a hydrogen fuel supply. So you should at least include nuclear as an option.

Saw a story tonight on the next fusion experiment going on, if we get nuclear fusion everything is solved.

 

[stsburns]

Effiency of current technology, till a new more efficiency is found. Hydrogen is good in all except for a few things. 1)It is increadibly unstable to store. 2)Hydrogen is combustable. 3)expensive to produce. But despite all of its negative it does have one positive. Your car will put out h20 instead of carbon monoxide.

 

[UtahBill]

Third choice should be BOTH. We should use what we have, find more when we can, but bear in mind that there is no guarantee that the fossil fuels will be around forever.
There are no viable alternative energy systems in our near future, not even our distant future. Maybe for our grandchildren. GM recalled all their electric cars because there is not enough support to maintain them. The $$$ spent on that project is horrendous, and it solved nothing, just showed that anything is possible if you throw enough money at it. We can't be throwing money away. Continue the research, and hopefully there will be breakthroughs, but don't count on it too soon.
The only thing that CAN be done, now, and cheaply, is to conserve our energy by using less of what we have, and building better houses, lighter cars, mass transportation in areas that have a high density population, and make less trips to the stores for things we really don't need right this very moment. That means lifestyle changes, and after the most recent events, we may be ready to accept that.