No. of Recommendations: 1
The sensible approach on energy is:
*Regionally appropriate means of generating power
You think it isn't? Little things like greens disliking nuclear power and oil and coal kings wanting to keep their moola source do get in the way.
*Nuclear power everywhere
You just used the words "regionally appropriate" above. I think it wouldn't be appropriate if you have geothermal power that generates enough, for starters. But we first have to dismantle the regulatory overburden to make it less costly, in spite of the greens.
*Changeout of coal for energy to coal for less-bad fuel (you make methanol with coal and steam, and you can drive a car on it)
You are up against the coal forces here. We've been experimenting (in our creative destruction way) with what works, and we don't seem to have settled on a winner yet.
*Embrace natural gas
It's embraced, but we also have a natural gas cloud over several states. We need to look at/invest in ways to plug it, and if it can't be plugged, can we use it somehow?
...while exploring renewables as gap-filing options. Had the democrats proposed that while doing all the icky boring things like upgrading the nation's electrical grid to be more efficient (we lose something like 30%+ of the power we generate in transmission and conversion losses)...they would have had a terrific and pro-growth agenda to stand next to.
30% isn't bad, once you consider how we built it. :) And BTW, Texas has money and went off the grid and has had a piss poor performance due to cronyism.
But no. They went all in on Scare Tactics (all the polar bears are going to drown and our cities will be underwater by 2010), if hurricanes don't wipe the US off the map then forest fires will, etc. Apocalyptic stuff.
The oil companies spent a lot of money getting the word out that climate change wasn't real, after spending the money to show it was there. There is no immediate effect to climate change, we just hurt future generations, and the person who can't afford a car doesn't care. We've been working on efficiency, but we still change the climate. We will go up 2 or more degrees, it's in the cards, our coast lines will change, but since we were talking over 100 years even people who acknowledge climate change balk at the price. It's a no win situation, but we're stuck.
