Tailgate Weekly Debate Topic

[Chavez]

man, I hope you are wrong about that. we sure are throwing a lot of money down the chitter if you're not.

 

 

I don't necessarily think of it that way - there just needs to be a sea change in our thinking in this country; anyone who isn't completely living in dreamland should be telling you that the key is getting off fossil fuels AND conservation. ETA - IMO making alternative energy viable is NOT a waste of money at all, it just seems some people think "oh yeah, once we get biofuels off the ground, it's full steam ahead again!," which probably isn't so. But who knows what will happen when/if things really get rolling.

 

Think of it this way - western Europe has a similar standard of living to the US, but uses 50% less energy. It isn't as if we're going to be living in cold mud huts and eating gruel if we start to choke back the consumption machine.

Edited March 9, 2011 by Chavez

[Azazello1313]

I don't necessarily think of it that way - there just needs to be a sea change in our thinking in this country; anyone who isn't completely living in dreamland should be telling you that the key is getting off fossil fuels AND conservation. ETA - IMO making alternative energy viable is NOT a waste of money at all, it just seems some people think "oh yeah, once we get biofuels off the ground, it's full steam ahead again!," which probably isn't so. But who knows what will happen when/if things really get rolling.

 

Think of it this way - western Europe has a similar standard of living to the US, but uses 50% less energy. It isn't as if we're going to be living in cold mud huts and eating gruel if we start to choke back the consumption machine.

 

hmm. well, say we come up with ways to harness essentially unlimited energy at reasonably low cost (to be clear, I'm certainly NOT talking about biofuels here) with little or no negative externalities...are you still concerned about consumption at that point? if so, why?

[Scooby's Hubby]

The only way I like the use of corn for fuel is if we WAKE UP and quit using corn for High Fructose Syrup. Then there won't be such a drain on the corn supply and food prices will fall, not to mention our nation's obesity epidemic. Corn is used everywhere, especially as feed for livestock and corn syrup, which have a direct relationship to the cost for food. If we were not using corn for fuel then food prices would be lower due to less demand and more supply.

 

Personally, Scoob and I try to buy products that do not contain high frustose, especially foods like bread, peanut butter and pancake syrup.

[Chavez]

hmm. well, say we come up with ways to harness essentially unlimited energy at reasonably low cost (to be clear, I'm certainly NOT talking about biofuels here) with little or no negative externalities...are you still concerned about consumption at that point? if so, why?

No, not really, as it is about the negative externalities.

 

But I don't see a magical unlimited, low-cost, clean energy source out there. So in order to move to alternative energies, conservation HAS to be a part of the program.

[Azazello1313]

But I don't see a magical unlimited, low-cost, clean energy source out there.

 

I see one setting over the mountains right now.

 

So in order to move to alternative energies, conservation HAS to be a part of the program.

 

if you assume the future is biofuels, I guess. if you assume the future is nuclear, fuel cell, solar, or something we don't really know about yet...not necessarily.

[Chavez]

I see one setting over the mountains right now.

 

Solar isn't quite there, and it isn't as on-demand dependable as fossil fuels, at this point.

 

 

if you assume the future is biofuels, I guess. if you assume the future is nuclear, fuel cell, solar, or something we don't really know about yet...not necessarily.

Again, at this point in time, knowing what we know now, the bridge strategy and probable long-term strategy would have to include conservation.