BF2S Forums President Obama on Historic Energy Bill

Cap-n-Trade is actually Cap-n-Tax

In my opinion there are three ways to get us to energy indepdence:

1) Cap-n-Tax: We artificially raise the price of existing technologies making alternative technologies competitive
  Pro: None
  Con: Energy costs 40-90% more for energy as Producers pass their increased costs to consumers.  Producers do not have an incentive to innovate.

2) Subsidize: We artificially lower the price of alternative technologies by heavily subsidizing them to make them competitive with existing technologies.
  Pro: Consumers pay slightly more for energy as the increased costs are used to pay alternative energy subsidy program
  Con: Alternative energies have less incentive to innovate since they are heavily subsidized

3) Investment: We invest in alternative technologies so some time in the future, hopefully sooner than later, they are competitive with existing technologies
  Pro: Consumers pay slightly more for energy as the increased costs are used to pay for research for alternative energy technologies.
  Con: Some technologies will take a while to compete with existing technologies as it maybe years or some cases decades



I prefer #3 while also investing in makign existing technlogies more efficient and less polluting (i.e. clean coal).

ATG wrote:

Does anybody realize that as a graph, the temperature of the Earth over the last ten thousand years would look something like this?


Nice flowery speech and all, but my hesitation revolves around the fact that scam and fraud will be the order of the day with most of this. Can you say cash cow?

Cap and trade will in effect be a massive energy tax, a historical increase that all levels of earners will pay.

gg democraps.

Who wants pollution?


Q: why the silence about building new nuclear power plants and/or nuclear desalinzation plants?

Spoiler (highlight to read):
because the democrats will not let it happen.

Fossil fuels are a problem outside of global warming.

I don't think cap n tax is the answer though.

Tomorrow the Senate is voting on Card Check and the House is voting on Cap & Trade.

Tomorrow is a BIG day.

ATG wrote:

If it settles far enough is there not some risk of causing a new volcano?

New Volcanoes? .. no. At least not with anything humans have now. Although if a volcano was getting ready to erupt we may be able to help it along.

Earthquakes? myea.. but mostly minimal.
http://blogs.discovery.com/earth/2009/0 … uakes.html

But the big question is, can a geothermal power plant cause a deadly earthquake? I admit we may never know until it happens, but the likelihood of triggering "the big one" by noodling around in the crust is pretty small. The Times graphic isn't very helpful in this regard, only pointing out that a cluster of "less than magnitude 3.0" and "more than magnitude 3.0" quakes have grown near Anderson Springs over the last seven years. It's a

strong-looking visual, but those "big" quakes -- just how big were they? 3.1 or 6.1?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/busin … odayspaper

Sort of like running a race, taking off your shoes, giving them to the Chinese man running next to you, and then shooting yourself in the foot.

FatherTed wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

This is a big one.
Replace historic with a word of your own choosing.

Do you think he'll actually let anyone read the bill before ramming it through?  If I remember correctly we had to enact the stimulus bill yesterday...  How'd that work out?  Damn it.  This man does not like the United States of America.

We can get taxed to death for polluting and get forced to go green while countries like China pollute and Iran goes Nuclear 'for energy purposes'.  Again I say this man does not have the best interests of the United States of America in mind.  He is intentionally weakening the country.

*yet the ABC lemmings fall into line.

Because China, India and current RIC's are polluting like crazy is not an excuse for doing so yourself.

Do you really think China and types will follow the USSesses lead?

His plan is unrealistic and detrimental to my country.

fucking great. They'll just raise tariffs on us and we won't be able to sell our goods there at a competitive rate.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

fucking great. They'll just raise tariffs on us and we won't be able to sell our goods there at a competitive rate.

You think we can now?

No. But I guess making it harder will fix things.

ugh I hope this doesn't get passed.

Looks like United States taxpayers will be paying Brazilian Tree companies NOT to cut down trees in the Rain Forest.

China will be doing a lot to improve their position.
China aims to lead in renewable energy

ABC news wrote:

What is less known is that China also plans to become the world's leader in renewable energy.

Massive amounts of money are being thrown into wind, solar and other environmentally friendly forms of electricity to power this emerging economic giant into the future.

In a poor rural part of China's north-eastern Jilin Province, massive wind turbines tower over the small village of Shuangliao.

If you drive down the picturesque coast in wealthy Shangdong Province it is the same story, the hills behind what were once quiet fishing villages are being covered in wind turbines.
The Government in Beijing knows that it has a major problem with greenhouse gas emissions and general air pollution and in China, there is no solution like an engineering solution.

ABC news wrote:

According to Zhang Xiaoqiang, the vice chairman of the National Development and Reform Commission, China will easily surpass its targets for wind and solar power by 2020, so it is now considering targets three times higher.

He told the Guardian newspaper that while the current goal for wind power over the next 11 years is 30 gigawatts the new target could be more like 100 gigawatts over the same time period.

He also said that the total installed capacity for solar energy would be at least three times the original target of 3 gigawatts.

"China could have a massive one fifth of all its energy from renewable sources by 2020," he said.

It will refuse a cap on emissions though, and wont sacrifice economic growth. Having said that they are still way ahead of the US or Australia.

someone just said that the earths temp has remained the same for the most part since 2001, yet Co2 has risen.  explain pls.

Last edited by usmarine (2009-06-26 14:04:18)

the Australians(politicians) have figured out the global warming, climate change... doesn't it feel a little warm in here scam.

"Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

"The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

BO and Co are hoping to slam this through as quickly as possible... the people are on to them.