I absolutely disagree. Solar power is not the answer. It eats up so much land!
Environmentalists don't want to build a pipeline because it disrupts
ecosystems, but eating up acres of land for inefficient power usage isn't
any better. The real future of energy is nuclear power. I've seen some
pretty awesome work being done with radioactive Thorium. It doesn't have
the same waste products as the nuclear processes we use now days.
World oil production has risen less than 3% since 2005. With cheap oil getting
harder to find we better start working on something new. We can't rely on
low grade oil sources like tar sands, and oil shale, for our future energy
Nothing like increasing everyone's electricity bills to satisfy whims of
"environmentalists" (who aren't as concerned about the environment
as they claim). I regret not having the determination to fight a better fight
against these ill-advised efforts.
This is the best news I have heard in a long time. We are standing at the end
of the carbon age, of polluting our atmosphere, of destroying our land and
damaging the health of all life on earth. This is the beginning and just what
our economy needs to create thousands of new jobs. This will also lower our
dependence on foreign oil, making America stronger and less likely to go to the
mideast with our military to protect our access to oil. This deserves our full
support for jobs, better health, lower CO2 levels and national security.
Developing renewable energy helps us import less oil from overseas. It reduces
pollution and health care costs.I remember when cell phones were
very expensive. Over time the cost came down. Had the early adopters not
existed, cell phones would have never gotten off the ground and we wouldn't
have them today.Obama has vision, I like this in a leader.
This is one step in the right direction on a long road into the future.
We need to find out how many of Obamas bundlers and contributers will benefit
from this. Does Solyndra still ring a bell?
re ThomasJefferson WELLSVILLE, UTFrom what I've read
in history, you used to be a farsighted visionary. What happened?
Well done. Now we have to publically invest in the country's manufacturers
of solar cells before the chineese and the germans capture the entire market.
His $500 million grants to companies that fail and putting this project in so
late in his only term that it will never make money, now or in the future for
what? He just wants some votes from a small minority but will make press on
this so he looks as though he is doing great. He likes to spend other
people's money without going through all the processes required by the
federal regulations to get the proper approval. You can't put in a
non-running water type of toilet on federal lands without going through months
of input and output. Now he is doing this in a time he is desperate for some
type of approval from the people, so he can praise His own works at His
Convention and get some applause to make the headlines. He is a man jabbing at
anything he can to bring up his approval rating with his people in Chicago and
by them also. This is not an Abraham Lincoln running for and as a President.
He doesn't have the people in the Cabinet to help our country succeed.
Governor Romney has people dedicated to our Country.
$2 Trillion for Middle Eastern Wars for oil...$25 Billion per year for Oil
Industry Subsides...No matter HOW expensive these solar projects
will end up costing, It's obviously pennies on the dollar vs. Oil.Good job Mr. President!Good job.
JWBKaysville, UT. Governor Romney has people dedicated to our
Country.8:28 a.m. July 25, 2012================ Governor Romney has his people and everything he owns invested in
Foreign Countries.He is an economic traitor to his country.Seriously,If wants to be President of the Unites States, He needs
to put his money where his mouth is.
We may not be using solar power twenty years from now, but I think this is a
significant step in a good direction. These studies will help us understand
what we have with solar power and what we can improve. I'm glad to hear
this news.It's a shame to me that we had to wait 3.5 years of
this presidency to finally see a significant step towards alternative energy. I
hope this is more than an election year stunt.
Mitt Romney invests more money in the U.S. each year than most of us do in our
lifetimes. Every financial investor suggests that we "diversify" our
investments, and yes, that includes foreign investments.
To "chaliceman" this won't reduce our dependance on oil in any
significant way. Very little power in the US is produced using oil. The US
uses coal, nuclear, and natural gas to produce power. All three of those are
produced within the US.To "LDS Tree-Hugger" the oil
companies receive no subsidies, and we have not entered any wars (yet) for oil.
We have entered wars to eliminate tyrants that were engaged in genocide of their
own people, or were giving safe harbor to terrorist organizations.Currently solar projects recieve direct subsidies that amount to $0.9680 per
kWh, while Nuclear receives $0.0031 per kWh.Plus, do you really want
us to becom dependant on the south american dictators that control the mines
where we get the rare earth materials for the solar panels?
I didn't know you were an Obama supporter...President Barack
Obama announced $8.3 billion US in loan guarantees on Tuesday to help build the
first U.S. nuclear power plants in nearly three decades, a move he says "is
only the beginning."Obama said the move toward nuclear power had
to be made to meet America's energy needs and reduce greenhouse gases."On an issue that affects our economy, our security, and the future
of our planet, we can't continue to be mired in the same old stale debates
between left and right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs," Obama
said. "Our competitors are racing to create jobs and command growing energy
industries. And nuclear energy is no exception," he said.BTW --
and as for the U.S. fighting genocide but not for oil -- but please how that
sort of U.S. Foreign policy explains Iraq but not Rwanda.Lame...
give me $500 MM and I'll do it. clueless
Liberal larry, you're wrong about the cause of the decline in oil
production. My brother works in the oil industry in Denver, and production is
down because of federal(obama) restrictions in drilling leases.Secondly,
when one doesn't learn from other's mistakes, it can be attributed to
slow learning or unawareness. But, when one doesn't learn from his/her own
repeated mistakes, it's plain stupidity, i.e. Solyndra and other green
energy companies funded by the feds that have gone bankrupt.
GoBanana: Is eats up land? This is true, but what are alternative uses for the
RedShirt: To "LDS Tree-Hugger" the oil companies receive no subsidies,
and we have not entered any wars (yet) for oil. We have entered wars to
eliminate tyrants that were engaged in genocide of their own people, or were
giving safe harbor to terrorist organizations.Oil companies do
receive billion dollar subsidies/tax credits each year. That is a fact. Conduct
a simple google search. The reasoning for entering into war with Iraq, has less
to do with promoting freedom and liberty and more do with with special interest
groups, be it oil or otherwise. If we simply wanted to improve the lives of
humans across the globe, we would have started in Sudan, North Korea, Syria,
Yemen, Iran, and many other worse off countries.
RE: LDS Tree-HuggerPlease explain WHAT oil did we get in those
wars?The fact is we are getting LESS oil fro them than before.Spreading unintelligible leftest ignorance and nonsense helps no
one.Like most conservatives and those on the right are we all for
solar energy that is economically viable and pragmatic. How much
land does the far left want to use for for solar and wind power as opposed to
the little used for pipelines?By the way we not getting off oil
anytime in the foreseeable future. Only nuclear power would make any difference.
the truth: The fact is we are getting LESS oil fro them than before.Often times less is MORE. We may be receiving less imported oil from the
Middle East, but maybe that was the point. Disrupt the production and
distribution channels and scare the market into raising the price of oil. It is
much more profitable to have a higher priced product that using more resources
to pump out more oil. Not advocating that this was the intent but its certainly
Reducing red tape for businesses to use public land...Is Obama running as a
republican? Aren't the environmentalists up in arms about this? And the
world gets stranger still.
I am fine with using government money and other resources to do basic research
into developing technology that will make wind, solar, geothermal, or tidal
power more efficient and less expensive.I am also fine with reducing
restrictions and regulations that will let private businesses develop practical
applications for this technology.But I am solidly against using
taxpayer funds to try and actually develop such systems. They tend to be a
massive waste of money because they lead to developing projects that make no
economic sense. You get huge projects built that cost way more than
alternatives. You get inefficient systems developed because the planners
don't worry about ROI. Private businesses rarely make such foolish
decisions because they are quickly out of business if they do. Government
instead often just "doubles down".I will install solar
panels on my roof when it takes 5 years to pay for itself, not 30. (BTW,
"paying for itself", doesn't mean that I get a huge tax credit that
just shifts the costs to someone else.)
Anyone remember Fukushima? That was one nuclear power plant.
America has over 50 nuclear power plants. They are all over 40 years old. Recently I belive this week a solar plan flew from Switzerlant... to Africa. Obama cleaned up the BP oil spill.
Any spills from solar energy is called a sunny day.