Your Questions About Sustainable Energy Fund

Ken asks…

Should the president issue a challenge to the American people to become non-carbon fuel users within 20 years?

I am actually thinking geothermal fuel.

admin answers:

Every president for the past 40+ years has said that we will become independent of imported fuel within 10 years….. Sadly, that has not happened yet.

The problems are many, but, in my opinion, primarily one of politics. The people in congress are more concerned with fund raising and being reelected than with <> addressing energy issues. One administration may start up some very forward looking programs and policies, then when the presidency changes parties, or the congress does, the other side defunds or cancels those programs and mocks the attempts to help develop sustainable energy policies.

Then it reverses the next time. There has never been a consistent, rational, long term approach from the government towards the issues of energy.

Pretty sad, if you ask me, and has been an absolutely terrible waste of energy.

Mark asks…

Can global warming and climate change stimulate the economy?

One of the craziest ideas conservatives pitch is how War and Tragedy spark economies. When hurricane Sandy ripped through NYC, it took away assets but created jobs with additional billions in funding. But conservatives didn’t want the money to be spent on IMPROVING things. Se essentially we are rebuilding the same wasteful energy systems in homes and businesses that caused the escalated hurricane in the fist place.

admin answers:

Conservatives aren’t wrong about war and tragedies stimulating economies as the need to supply the effects of those occurrences. However the recent natural disasters too did cause economic stimulation however government supply as much capital as some desired. When reconstruction from this disaster began insurance companies paid out for damages to their customers. This capital was not being used in the economy before and now it is, therefore more capital in those regional economies means economic stimulation in those areas. As to why the same energy systems were put in place is because joule for joule there is no more effective and efficient system in existence. Alternative energies are currently not anymore economically more sensible than conventional energies. When individuals decide to rebuild they choose the most economically sensible choice to maximize their reimbursement from insurance. I’m sure there are some individuals that decided that using more green technology as it may be economic feasible.
As to why it may be ideal for the government not to be directly involved in introducing green tech in to the effected areas may be that rushing in and not Analyze the economic structure of an area may not make economical sense. An example of something like this occurring is an ethanol plant near my house. Several years ago the government rushed in and subsidized for a plant to be build, However economic reasons the plant was shut down within a year. (Is now used as a water draw point for frac water). Point being in a situation as such it may not be economically sustainable for government to offer when it comes to certain systems.
As our climate changes (not necessarily due to human related causes) humans will do as they have been for centuries when the climate and environment change: Adapt and overcome. In these adaptions, economic stimulation can occur as it becomes more economical to change.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *