• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

It’s Time to Stop Spending Taxpayer Dollars on Elon Musk and Cronyism

countryboy said:
Manufacturing photo voltaic cells is not environmentally friendly. Our EPA regulations will never allow us to compete with the Chinese.
Click to expand...

Yes, Fossil fuels are much better for the environment. Only if you dump all the EPA regulations oh and allow businesses to pay slave wages, yeah that is the remedy.
 
JasperL said:
The only source of pollution for fossil fuels (or nuclear for that matter) aren't just carbon, and lots of that other pollution simply isn't "questionable." I could post some photos of shale oil pits if you like. And what is the "unquestionable damage" from mining rare earth metals that doesn't apply to mining pretty much anything?
Click to expand...

The toxic waste from rare earth mining exceeds nuclear waste, both in volume and toxicity... The only thing that's worse is lead mining (another place where solar power creates toxic waste).
 
American said:
http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/13/i...g-taxpayer-dollars-on-elon-musk-and-cronyism/

Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies - LA Times


This must be the corporate welfare that some want to stop.
Click to expand...

There is a reason that our government subsidizes new technologies. Theoretically it is a good thing. The problem we have had in the last ten years or so is that there isn't any audit procedures or accountability that is enforced. It turns into a good ole boy campaign fund. I have to admit that I don't know anything about this company. They might be good, might not. I do know that without govt subsidies we will never catch up with the Chinese where it relates to solar energy.
 
faithful_servant said:
The toxic waste from rare earth mining exceeds nuclear waste, both in volume and toxicity... The only thing that's worse is lead mining (another place where solar power creates toxic waste).
Click to expand...

I am going to hope that China takes care of the environmental damage before the global government comes into force.

Probably does not happen though.

Right?
 
Casper said:
Yes, Fossil fuels are much better for the environment. Only if you dump all the EPA regulations oh and allow businesses to pay slave wages, yeah that is the remedy.
Click to expand...

More hyperbole? Is that really all you've got? :yawn:
 
NonoBadDog said:
There is a reason that our government subsidizes new technologies. Theoretically it is a good thing. The problem we have had in the last ten years or so is that there isn't any audit procedures or accountability that is enforced. It turns into a good ole boy campaign fund. I have to admit that I don't know anything about this company. They might be good, might not. I do know that without govt subsidies we will never catch up with the Chinese where it relates to solar energy.
Click to expand...

There are all kinds of transaction processes available in the govt to fund technology development. In some cases the monitoring isn't good.
 
Casper said:
True, same for oil/gas, timber and coal companies, stop subsidizing them.
Click to expand...

Let's stop subsidizing people that don't do anything productive. If we don't subsidize productive entities, then we should subsidize unproductive entities even less.
 
American said:
Let's stop subsidizing people that don't do anything productive. If we don't subsidize productive entities, then we should subsidize unproductive entities even less.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am sure you want to cut funding for children, the disabled, and those living in poverty, after all it is Your Money. But that is not the topic here, now is it, we are talking about corporate welfare.
 
faithful_servant said:
The toxic waste from rare earth mining exceeds nuclear waste, both in volume and toxicity... The only thing that's worse is lead mining (another place where solar power creates toxic waste).
Click to expand...

OK, but still all you are saying is solar energy produces pollution. That's understood, so does nuclear, oil, gas, coal, wind and every other possible source of energy on the planet.

You're basically dismissing solar as inferior to, e.g. coal, but until we can compare the life cycle pollution of a solar panel with a 30 year life to the coal/oil/whatever necessary to produce an equivalent amount of energy, it's impossible to make an informed decision.
 
Casper said:
Yes, I am sure you want to cut funding for children, the disabled, and those living in poverty, after all it is Your Money. But that is not the topic here, now is it, we are talking about corporate welfare.
Click to expand...

We are talking about it. There are plenty hanging around doing nothing that could, and we're tired of failed policies that maintain their lifestyles of complacency. Jobs jobs jobs.
 
Deuce said:
What about tax breaks for religious charities
Click to expand...

Damn, now you want to abolish NPO's? Let me guess, the government can take that over, right?
 
Elon Musk made electric cars cool. Without him it might have been decades before that ever happened.
 
American said:
We are talking about it. There are plenty hanging around doing nothing that could, and we're tired of failed policies that maintain their lifestyles of complacency. Jobs jobs jobs.
Click to expand...

Assistance to citizens is not talking about corporate welfare, the topic, care to add something on that?
 
Casper said:
Assistance to citizens is not talking about corporate welfare, the topic, care to add something on that?
Click to expand...

It's all welfare. And the government is inefficient. Look at the Salvation Army, they give 96% of donations to the needy.
 
American said:
It's all welfare. And the government is inefficient. Look at the Salvation Army, they give 96% of donations to the needy.
Click to expand...

Then you make it efficient and ensure those that do need it get it and those that do not are thrown off it. It used to be Conservative ideal that if something is broken you Fix it, not trash it and get something new, but not necessarily better.
 
JasperL said:
OK, but still all you are saying is solar energy produces pollution. That's understood, so does nuclear, oil, gas, coal, wind and every other possible source of energy on the planet.

You're basically dismissing solar as inferior to, e.g. coal, but until we can compare the life cycle pollution of a solar panel with a 30 year life to the coal/oil/whatever necessary to produce an equivalent amount of energy, it's impossible to make an informed decision.
Click to expand...

But solar is presented as being a "clean" energy source when the truth is that it's one of the dirtiest there is. If the rare earth mines were here in America with the public knowing that the massive toxic waste they produce was the result of solar panels, the entire solar power industry would collapse under the weight of the protests against it. So we push a dirty technology as if it was a clean technology and people pat themselves on the back for it. Keep in mind that I'm a HUGE fan of passive solar (roof top heat exchangers supporting your water heater type of applications), but solar to electric is a horrifically dirty source of power that is being spoonfed to people as being clean. I hate the lie and the people pushing it as a clean source of power should be stopped from doing so, since what they are saying is being said to defraud people. If everyone got see just how horrific rare earth mining in China is, most would never consider solar to electric power generation. It's only the lie about "clean energy" that gets people to back it.
 
faithful_servant said:
But solar is presented as being a "clean" energy source when the truth is that it's one of the dirtiest there is. th
Click to expand...

I'll stop you there - you haven't presented any evidence that is the case, and what I could see with a bit of research online is that your statement is false, by orders of magnitude. Sure, solar is 'dirty' but that it's far cleaner on a life cycle basis than coal, and oil. Wind is better than solar, nuclear depends on how you measure the costs. It's possible I am missing better analyses, but you asserting it without any evidence isn't getting me there.

Furthermore, it just takes a couple of minutes to see that there has been a lot of progress in developing solar panels that require far less, or no, rare earth elements, so you're making an argument that assumes old technology cannot be advanced to solve much of that problem and it's wrong.

If the rare earth mines were here in America with the public knowing that the massive toxic waste they produce was the result of solar panels, the entire solar power industry would collapse under the weight of the protests against it. So we push a dirty technology as if it was a clean technology and people pat themselves on the back for it. Keep in mind that I'm a HUGE fan of passive solar (roof top heat exchangers supporting your water heater type of applications), but solar to electric is a horrifically dirty source of power that is being spoonfed to people as being clean. I hate the lie and the people pushing it as a clean source of power should be stopped from doing so, since what they are saying is being said to defraud people. If everyone got see just how horrific rare earth mining in China is, most would never consider solar to electric power generation. It's only the lie about "clean energy" that gets people to back it.
Click to expand...

Again, if you're going to assert that solar is worse than oil or coal, which each produce MASSIVE amounts of pollution, you just have to back that up with some kind of apples to apples comparison over the life cycle of a solar panel versus, say, burning oil to produce an equivalent amount of energy.
 
JasperL said:
I'll stop you there - you haven't presented any evidence that is the case, and what I could see with a bit of research online is that your statement is false, by orders of magnitude. Sure, solar is 'dirty' but that it's far cleaner on a life cycle basis than coal, and oil. Wind is better than solar, nuclear depends on how you measure the costs. It's possible I am missing better analyses, but you asserting it without any evidence isn't getting me there.

Furthermore, it just takes a couple of minutes to see that there has been a lot of progress in developing solar panels that require far less, or no, rare earth elements, so you're making an argument that assumes old technology cannot be advanced to solve much of that problem and it's wrong.



Again, if you're going to assert that solar is worse than oil or coal, which each produce MASSIVE amounts of pollution, you just have to back that up with some kind of apples to apples comparison over the life cycle of a solar panel versus, say, burning oil to produce an equivalent amount of energy.
Click to expand...

That;'s because the analysis you have access to are intended to make solar look clean, not to reflect the totality of it's harm. I have a good friend who's one of the top geologists in the world. His specialty is superfund type mining sites and how to deal with them. One of things they study in depth is the impact of China's mining industry. By studying the worst case scenario, they can get a better picture of the signs of a hazardous mine. He's one of the people who's talked to me about rare earth mining and how very few people are informed about how much rare earths are used in solar panels (and even in the generators used in windmills). It's a "dirty little secret" that the solar industry and the fed. gov't wants to be kept a secret. China has a vested interest in keeping the sites off of most people's radar and the only way my friend got access to the information he did was through expatriate Chinese geologists (you'd be surprised to know how many of them there are).
 
Goshin said:
Elon Musk is not motivated by greed. He made his billions already, and chose to invest most of it in technologies he believes will help humanity.


While I may disagree with some of his ideas, he's not the sort to deliberately defraud the gov for the sake of profits.
Click to expand...

yet without those subsidies none of his businesses more so tesla would survive.
 
faithful_servant said:
That;'s because the analysis you have access to are intended to make solar look clean, not to reflect the totality of it's harm. I have a good friend who's one of the top geologists in the world. His specialty is superfund type mining sites and how to deal with them. One of things they study in depth is the impact of China's mining industry. By studying the worst case scenario, they can get a better picture of the signs of a hazardous mine. He's one of the people who's talked to me about rare earth mining and how very few people are informed about how much rare earths are used in solar panels (and even in the generators used in windmills). It's a "dirty little secret" that the solar industry and the fed. gov't wants to be kept a secret. China has a vested interest in keeping the sites off of most people's radar and the only way my friend got access to the information he did was through expatriate Chinese geologists (you'd be surprised to know how many of them there are).
Click to expand...

Ok, but you can't expect the public to rally against solar, or take pollution that cannot be documented into account when deciding between various options, when the only evidence for it being worse than coal or oil are unsubstantiated third hand accounts that STILL don't make a life cycle comparison. Again, I can concede that solar, because current technology requires large amounts of rare earth metals, is not "clean" but that still doesn't mean I can conclude that solar is worse than coal or anything else.

I've seen the pictures of the Chinese rare earth mines, but the product of those mines goes into 1000s of products, almost definitely your computer, smart phone, TV, all kinds of electric engines, batteries, and lots of medical equipment. Should we avoid all those as well because China has such lax environmental policies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom