Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
I take issue with this. Fracking makes fossil fuels cheaper. And makes it more difficult for alternative energy sources to compete with fossil fuels.
|
And so again, you are not identifying the problem. It has been posted so many times.
$35 of gasoline in a car. How much of that gasoline moves the car? $4. Therein lie the problem. Solutions have also been discussed. Learn from history. One was the 70 Hp per liter engine. It polluted less. It had better HP. It consumed less energy. It was far more reliable. And it was stifled by people such as Roger Smith (GM), Henry Ford (Ford), and Townsend and Richardo (Chrysler).
My god. GM makes a car where the engine cannot even recharge its battery. Why? That is a symptom of the real problem. Clinton even gave them money to innovate - Precept, Prodigy, and ECX2. And still they stifled innovation - as any good business school graduate would do to increase profits.
Address that problem. All were bean counters - not car guys. All wanted to make profits - not better products. And so many Americans were so brainwashed as to hype more destruction - "Buy American". Even in late 1970s when reasons for those problems were becoming obvious back then.
Why do we need fracking oil? Because we are not addressing the problem. Then want to cure symptoms by increasing prices? Or banning it? Where is that a solution? That is the evil Bernie Sanders solution. Either he is lying to get votes. Or he is that brainwashed dumb.
Meanwhile fracking for gas has substantially addressed global warming. Is its a final solution? Obviously not. It is a stepping stone - part of the long process to a solution.
To implement your solution, then cite another energy source that has the same or more energy per kilogram. We want to fix a problem by ignoring critical numbers? Yes. Many extremist left wants to do that. Demonstrated is the difference between a moderate vs. a left or right extremist.
Show me solutions. Do not solve problems by banning things. That is not innovation. That is an underlying point in Ayn Rand books.
Already solar and wind (in America) have supplanted other less desirable energy sources. (Not confirmed) I believe wind now produces more electricity than coal.
BTW, who are world leaders in wind? Not Americans. GE, a company that should be dominate, is but a secondary player to superior (innovative) foreign wind generators. GE only recently marketed a new wind generator that is even competitive - as GE keeps selling off division after division to maintain profits. To enrich their central committee of the communist party.
So where really is this problem? You did not say. A shortage of innovation. For example, my room mate, an engineer, stopped being an engineer to become a salesmen. Immediately doubled his income. America increasingly does not want many Elon Musks. Since he is an immigrant. And so many extremists (ie The Don) hate one of the largest sources of innovation - immigrants.
Are we addressing a problem? Or only want to cure symptoms?
Best engineer in my class quit engineering after only one year, went to Harvard Business, and massively increased his income working on Wall Street. Why is that problem ignored?
Too many refuse to address a fundamental problem clearly defined in every paragraph here. We are not innovating to solve your cited symptom. That (and not banning fracking) is the problem we should be addressing.
But again, those noisy crickets.