|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Right on the money Gary....only one problem:
The US Federal Govt has its head up its ass:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/18/MNVE11ALRM.DTL&tsp=1
"Even as lawmakers of both parties talk about the need to shift the country toward clean, renewable energy, Congress is in danger of letting key tax credits that have fueled the growth of wind and solar power expire at the end of the year.
The Senate failed for the second time in a week Tuesday to pass a bill to help businesses and homeowners switch to renewable energy. The tax incentives have strong bipartisan support, but they have been caught up in a fight between Democrats and Republicans over how to pay for them."
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/us/27solar.html?_r=3&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1215281671-/eejwuMhe4HHdTKvougG0g
"DENVER — Faced with a surge in the number of proposed solar power plants, the federal government has placed a moratorium on new solar projects on public land until it studies their environmental impact, which is expected to take about two years."
Solar was booming as far back as the 1970's into the 80's until
Reagan eliminated federal tax credits. 30 year old solar technology
can virtually eliminate water heating costs (25-50% of your total
utility bill) for much of the world.
Meanwhile "Operation Independent Iraq" (OIL for short), offshore drilling,
and nuclear plants on fault lines along the Pacific coast is where the
money has gone.
Oh yeah, and there's already a car that gets over 200 MPG for under $30K:
http://www.aptera.com/
IOW, *current technology* would cut oil and coal demand by over 50%
if implemented. You have to ask yourself why the PTB are actually
fighting against these changes.
--- On Sat, 7/5/08, Gary Fritz <fritz@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: Gary Fritz <fritz@xxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: RES: stock to buy- GPRE
> To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Saturday, July 5, 2008, 9:39 AM
> On 4 Jul 2008 at 21:41, Randy wrote:
> > No matter how much we want or hope for a solar , wind
> alternative
> > energy solution .....it's not going to happen .
> Lump them all together
> > and the most optimistic forecasts are 5-10 percent of
> current
> > consumption.
>
> It doesn't have to be. I did a back-of-envelope
> calculation once to see how
> much solar energy could be produced on the government-owned
> lands of the
> desert Southwest. It would take an area of roughly 40,000
> square miles to
> produce energy equal to the ENTIRE energy budget of the US,
> assuming
> only 10% efficiency. The US Govt owns 200,000 square miles
> of prime solar
> real estate in Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. If they
> would cede 50k or
> 100k of that land to a US Energy Trust, they could launch a
> "man-on-the-
> moon" class of initiative that could make the US
> entirely energy self-
> sufficient, and virtually eliminate our dependence on
> polluting energy
> sources like coal or nuclear.
>
> Yes, there would be environmental impacts in the area --
> but consider the
> environmental and economic impacts of coal mining, burning
> coal or oil,
> disposing of nuclear wastes -- or engaging in wars in the
> Mideast.
>
> Should we try to replace 100% of the US energy consumption
> with solar?
> Probably not, as there are other problems involved. But it
> could provide a
> HUGE percentage of the energy this country needs, with a
> self-built and self-
> owned source of endless clean energy.
>
> Gary
|