Subsidized Stupidity
The WSJ explodes the myth of cost-effective "renewable energy sources" by examining the grossly bloated subsidies propping up the various incarnations of hippie power.
posted by Jar(egg)head at 12:26
Monday, May 12, 2008
The Patients
|
|
Contact Jar(egg)head
Recent Ravings
- Media Bias? Surely Not.
- Cheated
- We're All Gonna DIE!!! (Again)
- Got a Light?
- Jesus or Jerry
- Are we really helping?
- Just doing jobs Americans do not want to do.
- Southern Hemisphere Sea Ice Reaches Record Levels
- Smoke Break
- Sign
Recurring Rants
- Global Warming
- Darwin Awards
- Everybody Panic!
- Cow Wars
- Salad Days
- Ze Games! Ze Games!
- All-Natural Treats
- SFL
- Book Recommendations
4 Comments:
Not to mention the cost of crops being turned into "fuel' and food prices going up.
No doubt. If they want to advance "renewable energy sources", they need to dump the money into the research, not the attempt to use the technology before it's ready.
Make no mistake, everyone in America is not adversely affected by this. Those receiving the subsidies are doing great. It sucks for the rest of us though.
There are technologies just a few years out that will allow us to use plant waste in general instead of diverting crops. And other "renewable energy" will show up in the next 10 years or so as well. When they are ready. This will improve things greatly when it happens. Woot!!
Be that as it may, it is not ready now and we do not need to force it. Push it's development sure but not force it's usage with taxpayer money.
There are technologies just a few years out...
Problem is, there are always "technologies just a few years out" that will Save the World As We Know It. Meanwhile, we're sitting on multi-trillion barrel deposits of oil and not building the new refineries we desperately need. We're not using the resources our infrastructure was created to utilize, and that's just inexcusable stupidity at its worst.
Subsidization already is targeted towards research; that's the problem. If someone wishes to conduct research on efficient methods for converting "X" into fuel, I've no issue with that... but they pay for it, not me. Likewise, if they can make it work, they reap the rewards. That's the point of capitalism; you have to pay to play. Not that America even vaguely resembles a capitalist country anymore. The Democratic Party has very effectively put an end to that.
We import 15% of our gasoline, not oil, GASOLINE. This is because we have not built a new oil refinery since the 70's. It is estimated that it takes 10-15 years from concept to begining of production for a refinery. Then another 10 years before the refinery is in the black. There is a 4 million dollar application fee for a permit from the feds to build one and it has to be paid with every application. Not to mention the headache of the EPA, Enviro-Nazi's, and every other person who will say, "not in my backyard!" to navigate, all the time money is being spent and not a shovel of dirt has been turned over.
Politicians talk about competing on an international stage, yet hamstring the free market every chance they get. You want to create good paying, manufacturing jobs? Free up the oil industry. New refineries would employ thousands and help with fuel costs.
On another note, I'm surprised there isn't 30 refineries across the Mexican border making fuel and shipping it back in to us.
Post a Comment
<< Home