Exit Strategy

[glatt]

Originally posted by Undertoad
If the chicken guts solution can produce crude oil at $10/barrel, including the cost of getting the guts to the processor, it will be successful no matter who writes magazine articles about it. If it can produce it at $50/barrel, it's of little use. All we have to do is wait, because economic incentives will force it to be used if it really does work well.

AMEN.

But you have to factor in things like 9/11 and the $150 Billion spent in Iraq so far when you talk about energy economics. The US involvement over the years ($$$) in the Persian Gulf is all about keeping the oil flowing.

Oil is a hell of a lot more expensive to the US taxpayer than it appears at the pump.

As long as the government is meddling in things, why shouldn't it meddle in favor of alternative energy instead of in favor of Mid East oil? The chicken guts just appears to me to be the most promising at this point.

[tw]

Five objectives of the current Iraq invasion:
1) To clean up a mess left by the George Sr administration in 1991 when we failed to impose a political solution on Iraq after the military handed over a spectacular military solution.

2) Improve Israel's strategic position by eliminating a large and hostile military in that region.

3) Create a model Arab democracy to demonstrate to other threatened democracies and regional nations (ie Egypt and Saudia Arabia) how it can be accomplished.

4) Withdrawl US military after 12 years of occupation in Saudia Arabia.

5) Create another friendly source of oil so that instability in Saudia Arabia would not cause oil dependency problems and so that consumption can increase without international disruptions.

These objectives are attributed to Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld.

[russotto]

The US dumps all sorts of money down the rathole called "alternative energy", and gets little from it. At least money spent on keeping oil flowing actually does something.

In any case, charging the cost of 9/11 to oil is something only an anti-car, anti-techology, neo-Luddite greenie would do.

[glatt]

The "all sorts of money" spent on alternative energy in this country is a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what the government spends to keep Arab oil flowing.

In any case, opposing US self-sufficiency is something only an anti-American, anti-free trade, neo-conservative fascist would do.

Originally posted by russotto
The US dumps all sorts of money down the rathole called "alternative energy", and gets little from it. At least money spent on keeping oil flowing actually does something.

In any case, charging the cost of 9/11 to oil is something only an anti-car, anti-techology, neo-Luddite greenie would do.

Lets talk pragmatic, real world, cost of doing business. If anyone thinks the US is beloved in the Middle East, I've got somegreat ocean front property in Arizona for them. We are extracting a highly valuable commodity which our economy depends upon from an area of the world that hates us. There is going to be a price for this, Pilgrim, and only a fool wouldn't factor it in.

I love it when someone who knows nothing of science starts throwing around accusations of "anti-technology" or "neo-Luddite." I adore the freedom my car gives me, I think technology can be a terrific thing, I love green plants because without them, none of the rest of us would be here; and I studied as a scientist.

Petroleum is a finite resource. God is not pulling off another creation in a neighborhood near you where you will be able to get more oil. You may be impatient that research into alternative energy has not produced overnight results, but your desire for instant gratification will offer no solace to your children or grandchildren if you stop all research because the results didn't arrive yesterday.

The earth is finite, its agricultural land, its water, its air are all finite. Act as if they are endless and there will be a stiff price to pay. Since you are so pro-modern, I assume you are familiar with the work of Huffaker, Eugene Odum, Edward O. Wilson, and Robert H. MacArthur to name a few. Or do only us "Luddites" make a study of the research of some of the most honored scientists of the 20th century?

Can you even name the third law of thermodynamics without resorting to google?

[russotto]

Of course the US is hated in the Middle East. Who isn't? And where isn't the US hated? Unfortunately, the US is strictly constrained in where it can obtain energy sources from within its borders, by environmental concerns -- if Kuwait were to be part of the US, there'd probably be little oil drilling there because of protests about ruining the desert environment.

"Alternative Energy" research has been going on for decades with no real positive result. Well, except for ADM raking in some profits on ethanol subsidies. The subsidies that the US government is putting into "alternative energy" are probably diverting researchers from research that might actually produce something useful.

[jaguar]

Shell spends more on advertising how Green it is than it does funding renewable energy. Shell is interested in alternative energy developments for sure, the Oil is going to stop flowing sooner or later, or get too expensive to be used as such a major source of fuel and everyone who's in the game wants in on what's next, Shell, like every other big company with a long term plan is happy to sink a few Bil into research that may not show fruit for 20 or 30 years.

A shitload of development has happened in 'alternative energy' in the last few decades, just because it didn't make your fox news headlines don't think there isn't progress, it just takes a long, long time, hundreds of scientific advancements on the shoulders of hundreds more to get something capable of replacing hydrocarbons. Hell even hydrogen is often produced from Oil at the moment. But it will get there, sooner or later and I feel it's getting a lot closer of late, there are all sorts of forces and factors at play the the public doesn't really see. As always. Keep one thing in mind, Oil won't run out, it'll just get far too expansive.

We're not talking a small field here, we're talking geothermal to fusion to hydrogen to solar to wind to ethanol - hell, I've still only listed a small sample. Glatt is indeed correct, if all that money was fired into often starved programs the boost would be incredible.

To write off alternative energy sources research as a waste of time is frankly, naive, shortsighted and narrow minded.

Oh and tw, it's Saudi Arabia, no a on there end there.

[Undertoad]

Although the desert environment is supposedly more fragile than frozen ANWR. I don't know what that means but it bothers me that nobody cares about that point...

[xoxoxoBruce]

it might not be a bad idea to encourage folks to set their themostats to 65 and put on a sweator.

That's not necessary if you didn't have 3.5 people living in an 8,000 sq ft house. Way too much heated/air conditioned, UNUSED most of the time, house.

Although the desert environment is supposedly more fragile than frozen ANWR. I don't know what that means but it bothers me that nobody cares about that point...

I don't follow that??

Originally posted by xoxoxoBruce
That's not necessary if you didn't have 3.5 people living in an 8,000 sq ft house. Way too much heated/air conditioned, UNUSED most of the time, house.

What, is that some sort of statistical average of the typical American's living arrangements? What does the half person do? Are they homeless 6 months of the year and allowed back in the other 6 months? Or maybe they live in one 8,000 sq ft house with 3 people for part of the year and then go find new roommates? Now I'M confused!

[xoxoxoBruce]

One couple with an average of 1.5 kidlets.