Comments on: Terra Rossa Poll

By: Rex Davis

Rex Davis — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 01:36:47 +0000

Biofuels are looking better and better, oil from algea can be converted into biodiesel and it takes fraction of the area to produce multiples of the oil. Together with renewables and coal I see no reason we cant be energy independant.

By: Amy F

Amy F — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 20:35:32 +0000

Biofuels is not the answer. It shifts pressure on a non-renewable, non-food resource to a renewable, food resource. Taking food crops for fuel production just creates a different problem. Everyone will start complaining about the price of food AND fuel when too much of the “bio” used to produce biofuels is put towards producing biofuels instead of producing food for people. The US will then be accused of causing world starvation and global warming. We need a non-food based energy source that makes oil irrelevant and subsequently the middle east irrelevant. My vote is for nuclear. I also think we should tax oil companies to capture some of their profits that are then applied DIRECTLY (not go into the general budget)to finding the next BBD (bigger, better deal) in energy. The BBD is out there, waiting for us to discover it.

By: BOB UMBENHAUR

BOB UMBENHAUR — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 20:02:21 +0000

WE HAVE ENOUGH OIL UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EXCEPT WE THE PEOPLE HAVE CAVED INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL WACKO’S DEMAND THAT WE NOT DRILL AND EXPLOIT THE VERY RESOURCES WE HAVE. WE ARE SLOWLY CAVING INTO THE DEMOCOMMUNISTS, WORLDWIDE AND IF WE DO NOT PUT A STOP TO IT WE WILL BE AS ORWELL SAID MANY TIMES, WE WILL BE RAISING OUR SLAVE CHAINED HANDS PRAISING THE COMMUNIST MASTERS WHO HAVE ENSLAVED US WITH OUR PERMISSION. WE DO NOT HAVE THE INTESTINAL FORTITUDE TO TELL EVERY ALIEN WHO COMES TO THESE SHORE’S TO CONFORM TO OUR TRADITIONS,CULTURE, AND LOVE OF THIS COUNTRY OR PACK UP YOUR WORTHLESS ASS AND GO BACK TO WHERE YOU CAME. WE ARE CRAWLING WITH THE LIKES OF PELOSI’S, BOXER’S, RANGEL’S, LEIBERMAN’S, KERRY’S, FEINSTEIN’S, DRUNKENNEDY’S,McCAIN’S,DURBIN’S, BIDEN’S STABENOW’S, LEVIN’S, GORE’S, BOTH CLINTON’S, OBAMA’S, DUBYA BUSH’S, AND A MYRIAD OTHER WORTHLESS COMMUNIST BASTARDS WHO MAKE UP THE POLITICAL COMPLEXION OF THIS COUNTRY. THIS COUNTRY IS DEAD, ALL THAT IS LEFT FOR THE BLEEDING CARCASS,IS TO QUIT KICKING. THE VULTURE’S AND OTHER BIRDS OF CARRION ARE JUST WAITING TO BEGIN THEIR FEAST. WE HAVE BEEN TAKEN OVER BY ALIENS, WHO HAVE NOT FIRED A SINGLE SHOT, AND WE DESERVE EVERY DAMN THING WE GET, BECAUSE WE HAVE CAPITULATED TO THE LIBERAL MINDSET, WHICH IS AS CLEARLY A MENTAL DISEASE IF EVER THERE WAS. WE WERE ONCE GREAT,NOT BY CHANCE BUT BY HARD WORK, LOVE OF COUNTRY, AND ASSIMILATION INTO ONE SOLID PEOPLE, IN THE LAST 50 YEARS WE HAVE BEEN ON A BLIND MARCH TOWARDS BALKANIZATION! DOUBT THAT? LOOK AT THE SO CALLED “DIVERSITY” GARBAGE WE HAVE BEEN FED, AND YES BOUGHT INTO. WE ARE “SHEEPEOLE” OF THE VERY LOWEST ORDER AND ARE SO UNTHINKING WE BELIEVE ALL OF THE PSYCHOBABBLE CRAP FROM THE UNIVERSITIES OF BULL_ _ _ T, IN THIS COUNTRY AND AROUD THE WORLD.

By: Josh

Josh — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 20:26:11 +0000

Energy Independence is our most important issue right now. It is our national vulnerability. I personally support solar, wind and other types of energy that depend on ambient conditions as they are low maintenance compared to fossil fuels, biofuels and nuclear power. I also think we need to develop our energy distribution system into a decentralized system that emulates the internet. This way power is produced and consumed locally so that the chance for large scale black outs are reduced to almost 0%. This would help national security considerably and there would be no chance for corporations to gouge consumers the way Enron did.

Our economy could be turned upside down overnight by a terrorist attack on Saudi oil distribution lines. We are spending more money on defending our oil interests than it would take to develop technologies that would make oil obsolete as an energy source.

We need to end the oil subsidies and award entrepreneurs that develop more efficient ways to extract electricity from solar, wind and other ambient energy sources.

By: Mike Haran

Mike Haran — Thu, 31 May 2007 17:55:21 +0000

One of the most important tasks of the 21st century is for the lessoning of the dependence upon Middle Eastern oil.You can bet that with the loss of revenue the rulers in this area will do something to bring about a reduction in the attacks upon the rest of the world.Ethanol seems to be the best way to go,especially in Canada as we have an abundance of space in which to grow the stuff.The growing of corn for conversion to ethanol should be given the same priority as that given to bringing about the creation of the atom bomb during WWII

By: Mark S

Mark S — Sat, 12 May 2007 20:52:23 +0000

The poll favors biofuels, but biofuels take lots of good old Middle eastern oil to grow. Also, our transportation fuel needs are enormous, probably much larger than we can meet with biofuels, unless we all want to give up meat and become vegans. The best solution is IGCC coal gasification and very efficient plug-in hybrid vehicles that run on US coal-generated electricity for short hauls, and a combination of gasoline or biofuel and electricity for longer trips. As long as our economy is tied to unstable and hostile governments through energy, our national security is in jeopardy.

New generation nukes will be safer, but waste disposal, nuclear proliferation, and enormous commissioning and decommissioning costs will slow nukes coming online soon. It takes 12-14 years to bring a nuke online now. The principal cost of electricity is the cost of the capital required to build the facility. The interest on 1-2 billion dollars is impressive.

By: Alan Drake

Alan Drake — Mon, 30 Apr 2007 21:17:38 +0000

Speed is an issue.

The two 1.7 GW nukes order by TXU will not be commercial till 2015 to 2020 (apparently hard dates are difficult to get for new nukes in the US).

OTOH, adding new wind turbines can be done in 12 months (financial decision to commercial operation) for expanding an existing wind farm, and about 30 months for a Greenfield wind farm.

Natural gas freed by new generation can be used for speciality, high priority transportation (although Honda sells a compressed NG Civic) such as garbage trucks and city buses within a few years.

The % of wind that the grid can take can be dramatically increased by building more pumped storage (Google Raccoon Mountain of Bath County Pumped Storage)
and HV DC transmission lines to connect wind with pumped storage and load.

Nuclear can be the S L O W backup and second wave of new non-GHG generation, especially useful for areas with poor wind resources.

BTW: I doubt that the US could complete 4 new nukes/yr before 2025 under any quasi-economic program. We could add that much wind equivalent (30% vs. 90% capacity factor) annually in a decade. In other words, it would be well past 2030 before new nuke generation could catch up with new wind generation if both were pursued vigourously.

By: blueskieswoman

blueskieswoman — Sun, 29 Apr 2007 18:04:20 +0000

“All of the above”!!!!

Being from faaaarrrrr west Texas, I know wind power would be, and is, a wonderful addition to meeting our energy needs. A friend works in the industry & the initial costs are becoming much more reasonable.

However, we need all of the rest! I am concerned that we investigate thoroughly the impact of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, on mechanical entities. Our household has 5 drivers and we try to conserve fuel, but at the same time, our cars are all well over the 100,000 mile mark. Living in a rural area, this is not unusual.

Also, as the US has the refining capabilities for the ME oil, why do THEY get to hold us hostage with prices? If it just sits in barrels in the ME, the price would have to drop.

But of course, dems would go nuts — screaming that the sky is falling and how dare the USA think of itself first.

When do our Washington reps get with the program?

When they find a way to profit from changing and supporting all of the choices.

By: Robert Foulk

Robert Foulk — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 22:37:45 +0000

Have we forgotten Tesslers coil? We could have free energy that would be totally clean. The problem that the power companies have with that is the word free.

By: Jim Davis

Jim Davis — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:44:50 +0000

I am for all of the above. Each by itself will not be sufficient. I find nothing wrong with coal as I not a believer in the man made global warming theory. We have lots of coal. There is no sense in buying oil from jihadists when we can use coal.