Wisconsin native.
"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him."--GKC
"Liberalism is the modern and morbid habit of always sacrificing the normal to the abnormal" --G K Chesterton
"The only objective of Liberty is Life" --G K Chesterton
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Saturday, August 04, 2012
The Chart Says It All
Note that the Left's "preferred sources" are....on the left.
There is no real context for those numbers. That doesn't make them wrong, but they don't represent the intrinsic nature of the methods. Natural gas and coal are very efficient - as in converting potential energy to work. Solar and wind aren't. That is why research dollars should go into wind and solar. Which methods to use shouldn't be an either/or proposition. As the 3rd world continues to develop, you are going to need to find new sources of production to exploit like solar and wind if we are going to maintain our present standard of living.
To augment mz's point, there also is the concern RE: application and which souvce energy is 'highest and best use' for each and every individual application.
Energy applications for American medical interests in rural Uganda are different than providing energy for coffee makers in Cincinnati homes.
Continued private-sector-funded research to lower alternative energy costs is the key.
Research on my tax nickel? Absolutely not.
Abandoning the alternatives, however, is not an answer.
Let the market dictate the lives of the alternatives...not millions of gifted tax dollars to GE, Solyndra, et. al.
There is no real context for those numbers. That doesn't make them wrong, but they don't represent the intrinsic nature of the methods. Natural gas and coal are very efficient - as in converting potential energy to work. Solar and wind aren't. That is why research dollars should go into wind and solar. Which methods to use shouldn't be an either/or proposition. As the 3rd world continues to develop, you are going to need to find new sources of production to exploit like solar and wind if we are going to maintain our present standard of living.
ReplyDeleteMaybe the Feds should pay for 'research.' We could quibble, but I'll grant that for argument's sake.
ReplyDeleteBut we are installing the stuff and ratepayers have to cough up money for bullshit.
You want to install the stuff, fine. Pay for it yourself. Call it "research" if you like.
But don't make ME pay extra for electricity b/c you want to "research."
To augment mz's point, there also is the concern RE: application and which souvce energy is 'highest and best use' for each and every individual application.
ReplyDeleteEnergy applications for American medical interests in rural Uganda are different than providing energy for coffee makers in Cincinnati homes.
Continued private-sector-funded research to lower alternative energy costs is the key.
Research on my tax nickel? Absolutely not.
Abandoning the alternatives, however, is not an answer.
Let the market dictate the lives of the alternatives...not millions of gifted tax dollars to GE, Solyndra, et. al.