• 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!

Obama Says Commitment to Clean Energy Will Boost Jobs

Gill said:
gas tainted tap water ??? Why would that be a choice ?
Click to expand...



If their water supply is drained at least there is no chance they'll be drinking anything like this.
 
Gill said:
The problem with ethanol and water is not the potential for water pollution, it is the massive amount of water required to make ethanol. Dozens of towns have rejected ethanol plants because they fear the plant will drain the aquifers where there drinking water comes from.
Click to expand...

Thats fine, don't build them were water is scarce. Maybe next to a river, or a port. Kinda like we already do with oil refineries...

We don't seem to have much trouble refining massive amounts of oil despite the fact that it takes huge amounts of water for steam and cooling.
 
Last edited:
Ethanol is still just an additive that costs too much for the little it does.....
If it wasn't for govt subsidies, a lot of similar scams would have never gotten started.
 
drz-400 said:
Thats fine, don't build them were water is scarce. Maybe next to a river, or a port. Kinda like we already do with oil refineries...

We don't seem to have much trouble refining massive amounts of oil despite the fact that it takes huge amounts of water for steam and cooling.
Click to expand...

They can't use water from a river to produce ethanol, it has to be clean. Water used to refine oil is minicule compared to what is required to manufacture ethanol.
 
UtahBill said:
Ethanol is still just an additive that costs too much for the little it does.....
If it wasn't for govt subsidies, a lot of similar scams would have never gotten started.
Click to expand...

Obviously right now it is an additive, maybe that is all it will ever be, but how is it a scam? If we eliminated our subsidies and protective tariffs on ethanol, it would cost less and we would import more of it. Ethanol can compete with other pertroleum products on its own. The question is whether or not we want to continue to protect, invest in, and grow the US ethanol industry or if we are fine importing the now superior product from brazil.
 
drz-400 said:
Obviously right now it is an additive, maybe that is all it will ever be, but how is it a scam? If we eliminated our subsidies and protective tariffs on ethanol, it would cost less and we would import more of it. Ethanol can compete with other pertroleum products on its own. The question is whether or not we want to continue to protect, invest in, and grow the US ethanol industry or if we are fine importing the now superior product from brazil.
Click to expand...

Importing ethanol would defeat the entire purpose of using it. Gas is a much superior product to use in vehicles. Mileage with ethanol is significantly less than with gas. What makes you think ethanol from Brazil is superior to American ethanol??? Ethanol is ethanol. They just make it differently than we do.
 
Ethanol is a temporary solution. Not a permanent one. So yes the main question is if it is worth the cost. So far it can compete with natural gas as opposed to other clean energy solutions that aren't cost efficient right now due to lack of research and improvement. Should we invest in it? I wouldn't.
 
Gill said:
They can't use water from a river to produce ethanol, it has to be clean. Water used to refine oil is minicule compared to what is required to manufacture ethanol.
Click to expand...

Ethanol refining is an industrial process, it does not need potable water. They can treat water used in ethanol plants to the level that it needs to be in order to be used. They could use groundwater, surface water, waste water from municipal plants, or even re-use the water they already use. The average for the gallons of water used to refine a gallon of gasoline is 1.53. Ethanol is 3 gallons to one gallon of ethanol in the refining process. So it takes about 2 times as much. What it pales in comparison to is the amount of water it takes to crow corn, not the refining process.
 
LimeLight said:
Ethanol is a temporary solution. Not a permanent one. So yes the main question is if it is worth the cost. So far it can compete with natural gas as opposed to other clean energy solutions that aren't cost efficient right now due to lack of research and improvement. Should we invest in it? I wouldn't.
Click to expand...

It isn't lack of research, there is lots of research going on. scientific breakthroughts don't happen on any kind of schedule, no matter how much money we throw at it...
Ethanol production was good for farmers, for a while, now not so much. Last year, maybe longer, the news showed an ethanol plant sitting idle, empty, doing nothing except draining dollars from the govt subsidies...
 
It amazes me the line of pure bunk that the American people are being fed on this supposed "Green Energy"... None of this crap is proven and experts say that it will be decades before we see any real sustainable energy able to replace fossil fuels in this world if ever. Yet we allow our elected "leaders" to cut current methods of energy production, causing rising pricing, and artificial shortages.

Remember when the argument from the liberal left was that drilling can't be allowed because it takes too long to bring that energy to market? Well, where is their alternatives? They may never happen that's where. In the mean time they are making us MORE dependent on imports, not less.

What a joke.


j-mac
 
Gill said:
Importing ethanol would defeat the entire purpose of using it. Gas is a much superior product to use in vehicles. Mileage with ethanol is significantly less than with gas. What makes you think ethanol from Brazil is superior to American ethanol??? Ethanol is ethanol. They just make it differently than we do.
Click to expand...

Because they can grow sugarcane in brazil. It is cheaper to make cheaper to buy than corn ethanol and and depending upon the price of crude oil, cheaper than gasoline.
 
UtahBill said:
It isn't lack of research, there is lots of research going on. scientific breakthroughts don't happen on any kind of schedule, no matter how much money we throw at it...
Ethanol production was good for farmers, for a while, now not so much. Last year, maybe longer, the news showed an ethanol plant sitting idle, empty, doing nothing except draining dollars from the govt subsidies...
Click to expand...

So more research on these technologies wont speed up a breakthrough? I don't know about that. We did it with atomic bombs. Do we have to be in absolute turmoil to rush a scientific breakthrough?

I have nothing against ethanol and if we have idle plants laying around I say fire those suckers up. But I just don't believe it's an ideal permanent solution. If we are going to invest into something, it should be solar or wind.
 
drz-400 said:
Because they can grow sugarcane in brazil. It is cheaper to make cheaper to buy than corn ethanol and and depending upon the price of crude oil, cheaper than gasoline.
Click to expand...
Brazil has an advantage, more raw land, better climate, much more water, etc. for sugar cane production. So it is cheaper, even adding transportation to the costs. Doesn't mean we should be buying it. We could probably save more more gasoline by reducing speed limits than by importing ethanol from Brazil to dilute the gasoline we have.


We need to deal with our energy needs without too much involvement from foreign countries.
The primary need is oil, electricity is not in short supply and we can easily build more power plants.

OIL is the primary issue...
 
LimeLight said:
So more research on these technologies wont speed up a breakthrough? I don't know about that. We did it with atomic bombs. Do we have to be in absolute turmoil to rush a scientific breakthrough?

I have nothing against ethanol and if we have idle plants laying around I say fire those suckers up. But I just don't believe it's an ideal permanent solution. If we are going to invest into something, it should be solar or wind.
Click to expand...
Solar and wind are not alternatives to oil, they are at best a supplement to electricity....here is a good article about energy, the man knows what he is talking about.

http://www.questar.com/1OurCompany/newsreleases/2009_news/UVUSpeech.pdf
 
UtahBill said:
Brazil has an advantage, more raw land, better climate, much more water, etc. for sugar cane production. So it is cheaper, even adding transportation to the costs. Doesn't mean we should be buying it. We could probably save more more gasoline by reducing speed limits than by importing ethanol from Brazil to dilute the gasoline we have.


We need to deal with our energy needs without too much involvement from foreign countries.
The primary need is oil, electricity is not in short supply and we can easily build more power plants.

OIL is the primary issue...
Click to expand...


I agree with you here Bill, although ethanol is not even a good additive to stretch our own production because of what it does to the cost of food sources here in America.

We have plenty of oil, and should be drilling our own resource here to ween off of imports, while at the same time developing alternatives.


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
It amazes me the line of pure bunk that the American people are being fed on this supposed "Green Energy"... None of this crap is proven and experts say that it will be decades before we see any real sustainable energy able to replace fossil fuels in this world if ever. Yet we allow our elected "leaders" to cut current methods of energy production, causing rising pricing, and artificial shortages.

Remember when the argument from the liberal left was that drilling can't be allowed because it takes too long to bring that energy to market? Well, where is their alternatives? They may never happen that's where. In the mean time they are making us MORE dependent on imports, not less.

What a joke.


j-mac
Click to expand...

It takes decades to see results because we have a massive infrastructure to replace. We need to get started sooner rather than later, or we'll end up behind the technological and economic curve.
 
Deuce said:
It takes decades to see results because we have a massive infrastructure to replace. We need to get started sooner rather than later, or we'll end up behind the technological and economic curve.
Click to expand...

So do it....But do we have to cut off the current energy supply as before we have the replacement? How does that even remotely make sense?


j-mac
 
j-mac said:
I agree with you here Bill, although ethanol is not even a good additive to stretch our own production because of what it does to the cost of food sources here in America.

We have plenty of oil, and should be drilling our own resource here to ween off of imports, while at the same time developing alternatives.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Natural gas is a good alternative to gasoline, we need to build the infrastructure so we can get it to more customers.
Propane is a manufactured gas, not a good alternative.
and yes, use more of our own oil....imported oil from Mexico and Canada is a good thing tradewise.
But importring oil from halfway across the world from countries that hate us? That is stupid...
 
UtahBill said:
Solar and wind are not alternatives to oil, they are at best a supplement to electricity....here is a good article about energy, the man knows what he is talking about.

http://www.questar.com/1OurCompany/newsreleases/2009_news/UVUSpeech.pdf
Click to expand...

Yes they are a supplement to electricity. And electricity can power pretty much anything if enough is produced and/or stored.
It was a good read, but I think he's more concerned about emissions rather then clean renewable energy. That's my main concern. He also seems to believe it is rather impossible.

Government may HAVE to play a part in regulation of the oil and coal industries. Coal and oil work too well, why would an industry go into something that right now doesn't work and is not at all cost effective? They will continue on their path and if emissions are taxed they can make up the cost. Do we as Americans sit back with and wait for someone else to find a renewable solution?
 
UtahBill said:
Natural gas is a good alternative to gasoline, we need to build the infrastructure so we can get it to more customers.
Propane is a manufactured gas, not a good alternative.
and yes, use more of our own oil....imported oil from Mexico and Canada is a good thing tradewise.
But importring oil from halfway across the world from countries that hate us? That is stupid...
Click to expand...


Absolutely! gheeze, I have to say, of our disagreements in the past, I am glad that we agree on something...It's nice.

When I started driving truck, I worked for a company that ran its whole fleet on Propane. This was in 1997. I didn't see any difference in power, or how the truck responded in traffic, so although I am not sure why exactly propane is inviable, I agree that natural gas could be an alternative to the diesels currently on the roads. Lord knows that the current low sulfur, and burning of emissions in the newer models of trucks are a joke.


j-mac
 
LimeLight said:
Yes they are a supplement to electricity. And electricity can power pretty much anything if enough is produced and/or stored.
It was a good read, but I think he's more concerned about emissions rather then clean renewable energy. That's my main concern. He also seems to believe it is rather impossible.

Government may HAVE to play a part in regulation of the oil and coal industries. Coal and oil work too well, why would an industry go into something that right now doesn't work and is not at all cost effective? They will continue on their path and if emissions are taxed they can make up the cost. Do we as Americans sit back with and wait for someone else to find a renewable solution?
Click to expand...

It is being worked on, believe me. , it there is a breakthrough, the inventors will be very, very rich, even more than Bill Gates. Not that money is the only motivator, lots of scientific progress was made long before govt subsidies or capitalism were ever thought of...
 
j-mac said:
Absolutely! gheeze, I have to say, of our disagreements in the past, I am glad that we agree on something...It's nice.

When I started driving truck, I worked for a company that ran its whole fleet on Propane. This was in 1997. I didn't see any difference in power, or how the truck responded in traffic, so although I am not sure why exactly propane is inviable, I agree that natural gas could be an alternative to the diesels currently on the roads. Lord knows that the current low sulfur, and burning of emissions in the newer models of trucks are a joke.


j-mac
Click to expand...

Propane has to be made from other energy sources. It is also heavier than air, so finding a spark to ignite it is easier than with natural gas, which is lighter than air. Problem in the past with natural gas is transporting it. They seem to have made progress there, and less of it is just burned off at well heads..
 
UtahBill said:
Propane has to be made from other energy sources. It is also heavier than air, so finding a spark to ignite it is easier than with natural gas, which is lighter than air. Problem in the past with natural gas is transporting it. They seem to have made progress there, and less of it is just burned off at well heads..
Click to expand...


Oh, ok...I didn't know that.

j-mac
 
UtahBill said:
It is being worked on, believe me. , it there is a breakthrough, the inventors will be very, very rich, even more than Bill Gates. Not that money is the only motivator, lots of scientific progress was made long before govt subsidies or capitalism were ever thought of...
Click to expand...

I never said that progress wasn't being made and won't be made in a capitalist system. I'm saying due to the investment needed in general, most industries wont touch solar or wind with a 10 foot pole. But if we fund research of solar and wind we may give more incentive to do so with future advancements in that field.
 
LimeLight said:
I never said that progress wasn't being made and won't be made in a capitalist system. I'm saying due to the investment needed in general, most industries wont touch solar or wind with a 10 foot pole. But if we fund research of solar and wind we may give more incentive to do so with future advancements in that field.
Click to expand...


That is because these sources are unreliable...And will be far longer than it would take to develop current, known sources like Coal, and Oil.


j-mac
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom