MyFox
 

JosephThePoet's Blog

by JosephThePoet from Barrie, Ontario Canada

Last Post 1 day, 16 hours Ago


 

What a foolish way to pretend to promote alternative clean energy sources.  The cost of energy is sky high and some people want to up that cost under the guise that this will stimulate the switch to other energy sources.  Duh, you can’t act in a manner that threatens to cripple the economy and expect money will flow into the technologies you want.  And saying you won’t do anything until all the countries of the world agree to act together just proves you don’t want to do anything or that you are extremely naive about international politics.  Doing it ourselves and proving it works will make other countries want to do the same thing and would give us a trade advantage over them because we would already be there while they would be just starting out.

First you promote the growth of the needed new energy sources and then when they come online sufficiently well enough you warn the public in advance, for example 5 years in advance, that the taxes on the old fossil fuels will jump substantially.  This allows the people to choose to buy the newer products, like buying hydrogen fueled vehicles and signing on with wind and solar electrical generating companies to receive their energy needs, or to continue to buy the old gas guzzlers and staying with the companies that use fossil fuels to create electricity with the full knowledge of the high price consequences that will result from their staying with dirty burning fossil fuel sources.  That will then give an added boost to the already established newer clean energy producing product companies, and an additional incentive for new startup companies to emerge, which will reduce prices further and improve efficiencies as they gear up for an even greater production demand.

The main thing preventing hydrogen fueled vehicles from selling on mass to reduce their current high cost and promote us into the cleaner hydrogen economy is the fact that the majority of us cannot afford to, nor will we choose to, buy a vehicle that we cannot refuel no matter where we choose to drive it.  The politicians need to promote the installation of hydrogen refueling stations across the continent.  Once there are a reasonable number of stations throughout the country then the politicians will need to give assistance to local manufactures that want to build our hydrogen powered vehicles here and to companies and individuals who wish to be among the first to buy these new products at the beginning while the production starts ramping up and the unit costs are higher.

The politicians also need to strongly promote the building and installation of wind and solar generators across the continent.  There are other clean electrical producing technologies that should be promoted with tax incentives too.  The more electrical production we have the easier it will be to supply the hydrogen needs to move to the hydrogen economy.  Directed tax breaks to clean power source companies and their products, and the directed removal of tax breaks to fossil fuel providers, is part of the way to begin the process.

When the politicians recently spent the $160 billion on the so-called economic stimulus package I believe they said it was about 1% of the US tax base.  A country should spend some of the money they demand from their citizens on the country.  Can you imagine what would have happened if the politicians had said to the US public that they have set aside $160 billion dollars to refund 100%, or even only 75% or so, of the full purchase and installation costs of  wind and solar electrical generators upon them becoming operational?  Companies would have immediately ramped up production, and other people would have begun new companies, and they would have instantly started hiring people to do the manufacturing, selling, training, installation and servicing.  Instead of first borrowing the money and then hoping something good happens after you scatter it around foolishly, the money would have had to have been spent first and would have already acted to stimulate the US economy before any of it was refunded.  Requiring the operational installation aspect would have ensured the bulk of the money would have been spent on stimulating the economy of the US, instead of stimulating the Chinese economy by borrowing money from them so the refund rebates could then be spent to buy more Chinese manufactured products (Walmart type purchases).

The world’s governments have supported the fossil fuel economy long enough.  The problem was that electricity and combustion came online around the same time and gas power had the advantage of more quickly accessing the power and more mobility using the technology of the day.  Now that we have so much more knowledge our leaders should be acting to direct us along the intelligent path instead of continuing to promote this insanity.  Casually poisoning our water and the air we breathe is race insanity.  When we grow up as children we learn things and change our ways to accommodate our new understanding so we can progress positively through life, like learning how to walk, talk, look both ways before crossing the road, ride a bike, etc.  Why do we stop this intelligent way of progressing through life once we become adults?  It is time to take our learning and apply it to progress to a positive future for us all and, if we truly do love our children, to a positive future for all our children’s future generations as well.

 

13 Comments |  Add a Comment

Member Comments Total Comments: 13
Page 1 of 1
Legolas read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 4:07 PM

Carbon credits are a joke invented by environmentalist...the energy solution will be a multi-tier approach including Nuclear power...China and India will always out-pollute us...for now we need more oil until other credible energy solutions can come on line....How is Ontario? eh?....

jimbobbob read my blog
Jun 23, 2008 | 5:29 PM

I agree that carbon credits are a joke! Good comments.

Legolas read my blog view my photos
Jun 23, 2008 | 5:40 PM

Hey jimbobbob good to hear from you!

jimbobbob read my blog
Jun 24, 2008 | 7:27 PM

What's up Legolas? The election is getting closer, I can only pray that the voters see through BO!! Stay in touch!

JosephThePoet read my blog
Jun 25, 2008 | 7:02 AM

legolas

I disagree about nuclear. It is only adding another poisonous waste threat to 10,s of thousands of future generations and it will only take one disaster to cause a massive problem for today's people.

I also think North Americans are smarter then the governments give them credit for and would do amazing things if the governments gave them an offer similar to the one I specified above. The amount of time it would take to get new oil drilled and pumped out to only give a few years of additional oil to wastefully burn away could be spent to build non-fossil fuel electrical generators that will supply the same daily power that will last for decades instead.

Up here in Barrie I’m trying to find a place to move to, constrained by my own economic situation, by the end of the month. I hope I will still be here to speak my mind next month.

Legolas read my blog view my photos
Jun 25, 2008 | 8:38 AM

The French have been using Nuclear power for decades as has our Nuclear Carriers with no accidents...as far as polution did you know there are tons of natuarally occuring Uranium in the mountains of Colorado?...the Jane Fonda's of the world strike again...and now were over a barrell of our own making while the do-nothing congress lets it happen...

JosephThePoet read my blog
Jun 26, 2008 | 6:22 AM

Legolas

Do you have any idea of how much highly radioactive waste there is in the world already, and this massive bulk is growing daily. It will remain radioactive for hundreds of thousands of years. Do you really think that the public is aware of all the accidents and close calls that have occurred in the nuclear domains? And naturally occurring uranium radiation is not by a country mile as dangerously concentrated as spent processed fuel rods, and other contaminants, are.

Yes, let us all just grab everything we can now with no concern for the future of our race that will have to live under the threat for hundreds of thousands of years. Don’t worry they will solve the problem sometime in the future and there will not be any earthquakes, mistakes, shoddy contractors, or any other events to scatter the radiation around. Is that what your crystal ball says? We have other good choices to produce our energy needs that show respect for our race instead of just blindly pursuing our greed at the expense of all future generations.

The money and time it takes to make new nuclear reactors could be used to make cleaner and safer energy plants and constructs. Besides wind, solar, and natural gas considerations, we have a massive amount of coal that could be more cleanly burned and will not be nearly as dangerous or as expensive.

Jimmy-42 read my blog
Jun 26, 2008 | 8:38 AM

There is actually not that much nuclear waste, at least not anywhere near what the media would have us believe. We could be using breeder reactors to generate power, but, Jimmy Carter signed an executive order back in 1977 that prohibits the reprocessing of nuclear waste. By reprocessing the waste from a breeder reactor, almost no long term radioactive material is generated.

Legolas read my blog view my photos
Jun 26, 2008 | 9:32 AM

interesting points jimmy-42...also re:coal...it will take even longer to make it 'clean' to burn...we are like the Saudi Arabia of coal...too bad we snoozed for so long with alternatives to oil...

JosephThePoet read my blog
Jun 27, 2008 | 6:17 AM

Breeder reactors just use less new uranium, while still producing radioactive products like plutonium and other radioactive waste products. They create more usable fissionable material then that which is first supplied and can use other mediums to access the high nucleus energy levels associated with the fissionable materials that is the tapped energy source of nuclear reactors. Fission will always create radioactive waste that will last for hundreds of thousands of years. Not everything radiated can be reprocessed into fuel and the reprocessing of the usable materials created by breeder reactors creates additional radioactive waste also. Type in Nuclear Breeder Reactors in your search box and you will find many leads to articles for your research.
Just the initial start-up costs and the time necessary to do the building of the plants should be enough to give us pause in pursuing this risky energy creating methodology, and you can bet no company will be held responsible to pay the upfront costs of storing their waste for a period of time that will be way longer than man has existed to date on this planet. The pursuit of nuclear and the desire to drill for and burn more oil is the choice of those who cannot contemplate change. We would still be living in caves with nothing ever changing and not even using fire if they had their way because they are only users not inventors and creators, or because they are among those who are fearful of and hate change in their lives.

JosephThePoet read my blog
Jun 27, 2008 | 6:18 AM

Here is another site to start you off if you think nuclear is so safe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_civilian_nuclear_a
ccidents

And legolas, do you really think it will take less time to build or refurbish existing coal power plants to use the coal more cleanly and efficiently then it will take to build nuclear reactors?

Legolas read my blog view my photos
Jun 27, 2008 | 9:17 AM

yes...and the technology to deliver it w/o pollution is no where finished...and I'm sure most of those supposed accidents involve "background' radiation....less than what you get with a chest x-ray...

JosephThePoet read my blog
Jun 27, 2008 | 3:02 PM

legolas

It can easily take a decade to build a nuclear reactor. Do you think it will take longer to build a clean coal fired power plant? w/o pollution? How is nuclear w/o pollution? Cleaner coal burning technology is already being used and we have, as you pointed out earlier, massive amounts of coal.

And, you can read the "supposed" nuclear accident reports if you'd care to. I suppose you don't even remember the Chernobyl complete meltdown or the Three Mile Island partial meltdown? I would prefer an explosion of a coal fired plant as opposed to a nuclear meltdown.

Don't get angry if someone disagrees with you. Research the subject matter to logically argue your position instead. If you do some research you may find you were originally wrong then you can choose to be obnoxious and stay your course or admit you're wrong and adjust your position.

Page 1 of 1


Write your comment below:




JosephThePoet

I have diplomas in electronics and computer programming, and an employment background that includes security, supervisory, and laser communications components manufacture and trouble shooting. I am receiving a small provincial disability support and am trying to earn a living as a poet. My first poetry book "Life is a Puzzle" by JosephThePoet can be found at: http://www.barnesandnoble
.com/ http://www.publishamerica
.com/ http://www.amazon.com/

Member Since: 1/17/2008