Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush Urges Development of Alternative Fuels

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:41 AM
Original message
Bush Urges Development of Alternative Fuels
Bush Urges Development of Alternate Fuels

Monday May 16, 2005 5:16 PM

By JENNIFER LOVEN

Associated Press Writer

WEST POINT, Va. (AP) - With gasoline prices soaring, President Bush urged Congress on Monday to encourage development of alternate fuels like biodiesel and ethanol to make the United States less dependent on foreign oil.

``Our dependence on foreign oil is like a foreign tax on the American dream, and that tax is growing every year,'' Bush said at the Virginia BioDiesel Refinery about 140 miles south of Washington.

Bush flew here, about 30 miles from Richmond, to visit a production facility for biodiesel, an alternative fuel made from soybeans that is cleaner-burning and American-made, but carries a higher price tag that regular diesel fuel. It is often blended with conventional transportation fuels as an extender.

Before his speech, the president got a demonstration of how biodiesel is made - and how cleanly it burns in an engine. Bush was given a white handkerchief that had been held on an exhaust pipe of a revved-up 18-wheeler, and deemed it clean enough to hold up to his nose.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5009427,00.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
realcountrymusic Donating Member (999 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
1. if only
we could run everything on bushit

rcm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
losdiablosgato Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. We can, it is called bio diesel
The more I read about this the more I like it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynzM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. Oh, NOW he gets to it.
Why the heck not FIVE YEARS AGO, before things got to this point? Thinking about the future? That's for wimps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
okieinpain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #2
16. yeah, I trying to remember some of the names that they called
gore for bring up alternatives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrendaStarr Donating Member (491 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. Biodiesel and ethanol?
Those are real solutions like hydrogen.

So, of course Bush loves them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #28
42. I looked to see where you lived. If you were out
here in the farm states you might realize that much of the crops we grow and many of our other vehicles are using ethanol. This science needs to be refined and improved on but it is being used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
3. His idea of alternative - Unleaded, diesel, Premium - alternatives
from crude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pinboy Donating Member (268 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #3
41. Hahaha!
And couple that with clean coal and new, improved, healthy nuclear, and you've got his entire innovative energy program.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
htuttle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
4. If only he really meant it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rainscents Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
5. He is full of shit! He is talking both side of his mouth... again!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
natrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. you think he get's it? please
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merwin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. Near the end of the article, he is pushing for more refineries. Doubletalk
supreme!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Megahurtz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
40. AND Nuclear Power Plants!
Special!:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #5
34. Damn right!
Edited on Mon May-16-05 02:56 PM by calipendence
When he first took office, his administration chopped the budget for alternative energy research by over half.

A year or so ago he tried to make a big splash that he wanted to build a new program to develop alternative energy to middle east oil, since the administration must have sensed public sentiment of not wanting to be dependent on middle east oil at that time. Trouble was, that he tied any funding of this program to congressional approval of drilling in ANWR, and it's profits, so you know where that went. And he was so consistently for developing oil alternatives that he selectively chose Florida to use federal money to buy up off-shore oil drilling leases to keep them from drilling *there* where his bro was dependent on picking up some added votes to continue on as governor. There he was an "environmentalist president" helping out his "environmentalist" brother. Every place else he's all about pulling out the stops to get us off of middle east oil dependence. Pardon me why I take a break to gag over the toilet.

The guy is *all* about crony capitalism.

I don't believe this spiel for a moment. There *are* cronies here to find someplace.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eternalburn Donating Member (400 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
6. Yeah sure,... right after we go to Mars, eh? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grumpy old fart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. Gonna have to be faith based development though....no $$ of course
Edited on Mon May-16-05 11:47 AM by grumpy old fart
We've needed an "Apollo" type alternative energy program for a long time, but it's not gonna happen. The talibush would rather spend our billions killing brown innocents than actually address the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Faith Based Fuels
On the wings of Angels
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jobycom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
9. Wow. I think that's a white flag being raised over Iraq
Bush had planned to control Iraqi oil as our own private reserve. Maybe he's admitting he's lost Iraq, and searching for plan B. Which happens to be the same stuff the Democrats were saying twenty years ago... Conservatives: only slightly ahead of the stone age.

Knowing Bush, though, it's probably just another smokescreen. He'll talk the talk, but unless it gets money to his oil buddies, he won't do anything about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
plcdude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #9
15. I agree
I think it was assumed we would avoid the current oil crises by controlling our own oil field and as can be seen everyday that is not possible and may never be possible. So now he is forced to discuss alternative sources. He has not earmarked any real funding for this but then like no child left behind he is not really serious about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. That is the essence of the problem.
I have been waiting for them to release or even mention some very old and interesting solutions, forget that.

It is all about money for his friends in the petroleum/mining/military industry. These idiots are losing everywhere Middle East, South America, Russia, Indonesia, and are unwilling to release the technologies that might have solved (not nuclear) the energy crisis years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #18
23. Gonna push 'clean coal'
and 'kindler gentler nukes' as alternatives. The nuclear lobby is really revved up. Went to an 'Energy Seminar' a few weeks back and incompetent DOE wonk was really pushing the clean coal bit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gordianot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Nikolai Telsa "free energy"
The same man who gave us alternating current, talked about "free energy" and made some prototypes in the 1930's. Most modern engineers will not allow Telsa to be mentioned and place him in the "nut" category.

Westinghouse still owns the research. There are a few rouge patents out there that hint at the possibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chlamor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Tesla was insanely brilliant
A real genius.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
19. Even the neocons are screaming about conservation, why not bush*?
I recall those a**holes like Charles Krauthammer are writing about it and stupid Doug Feith bought one. Hey, America, cut down!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merwin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
11. Wow, he's talking about his magic wand again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daphne08 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:54 AM
Response to Original message
12. I won't hold my breath!
The truth is America had a wake-up call in 1973, and as a country, we should have started some serious work on this problem back then!

The people should have demanded it, and yes, I also blame myself because I was driving at that time, too. (It was just so easy to go back to the old way of thinking after fuel prices dropped back down.)

From everything I've read, this government (pushed by Big OIL) has quashed and suppressed almost every serious attempt at alternative energy research.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d.l.Green Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
14. WTF? Disingenuous a-hole! It sure is a tax, but making his buds rich! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nine30 Donating Member (593 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:03 PM
Response to Original message
17. Alternative fuels like different isomers of ocatane..
or maybe propane, or pentane..or iso-butane , or other long chain saturated hydrocarbons. Surely there has to be other alternatives to the octane (gas) we all love.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
20. Bush alternative fuels = ADM, Con-agra giveaway program
don't believe the hype
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JRob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. The guy will SAY ANYTHING if he feels it will garner points...
he the embodiment of Jon Lovitz on SNL "The Liar", "Yeah ... that's the ticket... alternative fuel (that ought to shut those liberal, tree-huggin' eco-nuts up for a while)."

Right! Let see, how many ex-oil execs are part or patsy's of this administration? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Decay Donating Member (85 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
22. This is what he probably means...
Bush: It keeps me going!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
25. Whatever, asshole
Edited on Mon May-16-05 01:08 PM by hatrack
Just gotta love it when President Weaknstupid suddenly "discovers" biodiesel or conservation or fuel cells and pimps it for a day or two at his little photo-ops.

But what I remember most about Bush and his energy "policies" came from the 2000 campaign. The Simian Pretender got up on a stage in front of a crowd of autoworkers with Gov. Engler of Michigan and actually made fun of Gore for proposing tax credits for hybrid cars. The crowd really yukked it up, too.

I wonder who's laughing now? Not Detroit, that's for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ezlivin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 12:43 PM
Response to Original message
26. Bush is way behind the times; Carter kicks his ass to the curb
Jimmy Carter saw the writing on the wall.

This is what a leader can do:


Tonight I want to have an unpleasant talk with you about a problem unprecedented in our history. With the exception of preventing war, this is the greatest challenge our country will face during our lifetimes. The energy crisis has not yet overwhelmed us, but it will if we do not act quickly.

It is a problem we will not solve in the next few years, and it is likely to get progressively worse through the rest of this century.

We must not be selfish or timid if we hope to have a decent world for our children and grandchildren.

We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us.

Two days from now, I will present my energy proposals to the Congress. Its members will be my partners and they have already given me a great deal of valuable advice. Many of these proposals will be unpopular. Some will cause you to put up with inconveniences and to make sacrifices.

The most important thing about these proposals is that the alternative may be a national catastrophe. Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation.

Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern. This difficult effort will be the "moral equivalent of war" -- except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not destroy.

I know that some of you may doubt that we face real energy shortages. The 1973 gasoline lines are gone, and our homes are warm again. But our energy problem is worse tonight than it was in 1973 or a few weeks ago in the dead of winter. It is worse because more waste has occurred, and more time has passed by without our planning for the future. And it will get worse every day until we act.

The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are running out. In spite of increased effort, domestic production has been dropping steadily at about six percent a year. Imports have doubled in the last five years. Our nation's independence of economic and political action is becoming increasingly constrained. Unless profound changes are made to lower oil consumption, we now believe that early in the 1980s the world will be demanding more oil that it can produce.

The world now uses about 60 million barrels of oil a day and demand increases each year about 5 percent. This means that just to stay even we need the production of a new Texas every year, an Alaskan North Slope every nine months, or a new Saudi Arabia every three years. Obviously, this cannot continue.

We must look back in history to understand our energy problem. Twice in the last several hundred years there has been a transition in the way people use energy.

The first was about 200 years ago, away from wood -- which had provided about 90 percent of all fuel -- to coal, which was more efficient. This change became the basis of the Industrial Revolution.

The second change took place in this century, with the growing use of oil and natural gas. They were more convenient and cheaper than coal, and the supply seemed to be almost without limit. They made possible the age of automobile and airplane travel. Nearly everyone who is alive today grew up during this age and we have never known anything different.

Because we are now running out of gas and oil, we must prepare quickly for a third change, to strict conservation and to the use of coal and permanent renewable energy sources, like solar power.

The world has not prepared for the future. During the 1950s, people used twice as much oil as during the 1940s. During the 1960s, we used twice as much as during the 1950s. And in each of those decades, more oil was consumed than in all of mankind's previous history.

World consumption of oil is still going up. If it were possible to keep it rising during the 1970s and 1980s by 5 percent a year as it has in the past, we could use up all the proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.

I know that many of you have suspected that some supplies of oil and gas are being withheld. You may be right, but suspicions about oil companies cannot change the fact that we are running out of petroleum.

All of us have heard about the large oil fields on Alaska's North Slope. In a few years when the North Slope is producing fully, its total output will be just about equal to two years' increase in our nation's energy demand.

Each new inventory of world oil reserves has been more disturbing than the last. World oil production can probably keep going up for another six or eight years. But some time in the 1980s it can't go up much more. Demand will overtake production. We have no choice about that.

But we do have a choice about how we will spend the next few years. Each American uses the energy equivalent of 60 barrels of oil per person each year. Ours is the most wasteful nation on earth. We waste more energy than we import. With about the same standard of living, we use twice as much energy per person as do other countries like Germany, Japan and Sweden.

One choice is to continue doing what we have been doing before. We can drift along for a few more years.

Our consumption of oil would keep going up every year. Our cars would continue to be too large and inefficient. Three-quarters of them would continue to carry only one person -- the driver -- while our public transportation system continues to decline. We can delay insulating our houses, and they will continue to lose about 50 percent of their heat in waste.

We can continue using scarce oil and natural to generate electricity, and continue wasting two-thirds of their fuel value in the process.

If we do not act, then by 1985 we will be using 33 percent more energy than we do today.

We can't substantially increase our domestic production, so we would need to import twice as much oil as we do now. Supplies will be uncertain. The cost will keep going up. Six years ago, we paid $3.7 billion for imported oil. Last year we spent $37 billion -- nearly ten times as much -- and this year we may spend over $45 billion.

Unless we act, we will spend more than $550 billion for imported oil by 1985 -- more than $2,500 a year for every man, woman, and child in America. Along with that money we will continue losing American jobs and becoming increasingly vulnerable to supply interruptions.

Now we have a choice. But if we wait, we will live in fear of embargoes. We could endanger our freedom as a sovereign nation to act in foreign affairs. Within ten years we would not be able to import enough oil -- from any country, at any acceptable price.

If we wait, and do not act, then our factories will not be able to keep our people on the job with reduced supplies of fuel. Too few of our utilities will have switched to coal, our most abundant energy source.

We will not be ready to keep our transportation system running with smaller, more efficient cars and a better network of buses, trains and public transportation.

We will feel mounting pressure to plunder the environment. We will have a crash program to build more nuclear plants, strip-mine and burn more coal, and drill more offshore wells than we will need if we begin to conserve now. Inflation will soar, production will go down, people will lose their jobs. Intense competition will build up among nations and among the different regions within our own country.

If we fail to act soon, we will face an economic, social and political crisis that will threaten our free institutions.

But we still have another choice. We can begin to prepare right now. We can decide to act while there is time.

That is the concept of the energy policy we will present on Wednesday. Our national energy plan is based on ten fundamental principles.

The first principle is that we can have an effective and comprehensive energy policy only if the government takes responsibility for it and if the people understand the seriousness of the challenge and are willing to make sacrifices.

The second principle is that healthy economic growth must continue. Only by saving energy can we maintain our standard of living and keep our people at work. An effective conservation program will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs.

The third principle is that we must protect the environment. Our energy problems have the same cause as our environmental problems -- wasteful use of resources. Conservation helps us solve both at once.

The fourth principle is that we must reduce our vulnerability to potentially devastating embargoes. We can protect ourselves from uncertain supplies by reducing our demand for oil, making the most of our abundant resources such as coal, and developing a strategic petroleum reserve.

The fifth principle is that we must be fair. Our solutions must ask equal sacrifices from every region, every class of people, every interest group. Industry will have to do its part to conserve, just as the consumers will. The energy producers deserve fair treatment, but we will not let the oil companies profiteer.

The sixth principle, and the cornerstone of our policy, is to reduce the demand through conservation. Our emphasis on conservation is a clear difference between this plan and others which merely encouraged crash production efforts. Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy. Conservation is the only way we can buy a barrel of oil for a few dollars. It costs about $13 to waste it.

The seventh principle is that prices should generally reflect the true replacement costs of energy. We are only cheating ourselves if we make energy artificially cheap and use more than we can really afford.

The eighth principle is that government policies must be predictable and certain. Both consumers and producers need policies they can count on so they can plan ahead. This is one reason I am working with the Congress to create a new Department of Energy, to replace more than 50 different agencies that now have some control over energy.

The ninth principle is that we must conserve the fuels that are scarcest and make the most of those that are more plentiful. We can't continue to use oil and gas for 75 percent of our consumption when they make up seven percent of our domestic reserves. We need to shift to plentiful coal while taking care to protect the environment, and to apply stricter safety standards to nuclear energy.

The tenth principle is that we must start now to develop the new, unconventional sources of energy we will rely on in the next century.

These ten principles have guided the development of the policy I would describe to you and the Congress on Wednesday.

Our energy plan will also include a number of specific goals, to measure our progress toward a stable energy system.

These are the goals we set for 1985:

--Reduce the annual growth rate in our energy demand to less than two percent.

--Reduce gasoline consumption by ten percent below its current level.

--Cut in half the portion of United States oil which is imported, from a potential level of 16 million barrels to six million barrels a day.

--Establish a strategic petroleum reserve of one billion barrels, more than six months' supply.

--Increase our coal production by about two thirds to more than 1 billion tons a year.

--Insulate 90 percent of American homes and all new buildings.

--Use solar energy in more than two and one-half million houses.

We will monitor our progress toward these goals year by year. Our plan will call for stricter conservation measures if we fall behind.

I cant tell you that these measures will be easy, nor will they be popular. But I think most of you realize that a policy which does not ask for changes or sacrifices would not be an effective policy.

This plan is essential to protect our jobs, our environment, our standard of living, and our future.

Whether this plan truly makes a difference will be decided not here in Washington, but in every town and every factory, in every home an don every highway and every farm.

I believe this can be a positive challenge. There is something especially American in the kinds of changes we have to make. We have been proud, through our history of being efficient people.

We have been proud of our leadership in the world. Now we have a chance again to give the world a positive example.

And we have been proud of our vision of the future. We have always wanted to give our children and grandchildren a world richer in possibilities than we've had. They are the ones we must provide for now. They are the ones who will suffer most if we don't act.

I've given you some of the principles of the plan.

I am sure each of you will find something you don't like about the specifics of our proposal. It will demand that we make sacrifices and changes in our lives. To some degree, the sacrifices will be painful -- but so is any meaningful sacrifice. It will lead to some higher costs, and to some greater inconveniences for everyone.

But the sacrifices will be gradual, realistic and necessary. Above all, they will be fair. No one will gain an unfair advantage through this plan. No one will be asked to bear an unfair burden. We will monitor the accuracy of data from the oil and natural gas companies, so that we will know their true production, supplies, reserves, and profits.

The citizens who insist on driving large, unnecessarily powerful cars must expect to pay more for that luxury.

We can be sure that all the special interest groups in the country will attack the part of this plan that affects them directly. They will say that sacrifice is fine, as long as other people do it, but that their sacrifice is unreasonable, or unfair, or harmful to the country. If they succeed, then the burden on the ordinary citizen, who is not organized into an interest group, would be crushing.

There should be only one test for this program: whether it will help our country.

Other generation of Americans have faced and mastered great challenges. I have faith that meeting this challenge will make our own lives even richer. If you will join me so that we can work together with patriotism and courage, we will again prove that our great nation can lead the world into an age of peace, independence and freedom.

Jimmy Carter, "The President's Proposed Energy Policy." 18 April 1977. Vital Speeches of the Day, Vol. XXXXIII, No. 14, May 1, 1977, pp. 418-420.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
damntexdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
29. Bush urges development of alternative fools.
Those already members of the GOP are not enough, says prez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massachusetts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
30. Bush Urges Development of Alternate Fuels
Where's the $$$$$$$$$$ for this?

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sadiesworld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 02:11 PM
Response to Original message
32. Enviro-nazi.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
33. It isn't enough to "demand development" of alternatives.
We have to mandate a percentage of each gallon of gasoline and diesel fuel sold in this country come from alternative sources. Unless it's required by law the constant fluctuation in the price of a barrel oil will mean that alternative sources won't be able to make a profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlGore-08.com Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
35. "Alternative Fuels" is a smoke screen for nuclear plants
Team Smirk really want to jump start nuclear energy, and dollars to donuts any bill that seems to be about "Alternative Fuels" that hits Congress between now and January 22, 2009 will contain stealth pork for the nuclear power industry.

There have been a number of really bizarre articles over the past few months that claim environmentalists are changing their minds about nuclear power. I assume this is so our under-educated-especially-in-science fellow Americans (who can be persuaded to buy gel drain cleaner because liquid drain cleaners are liquid but gel drain cleaners are not liquid) will confuse nuclear fission and nuclear fusion, and work to have Haliburton erect Chernobyl II in their back yards...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Booster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
36. Sure, that's why one of his first acts was to cut out a lot of money
for research in this field. He's just a liar, folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peakoiler Donating Member (13 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
37. Republican Congressman on peak oil
I recently ran across this interview with Rep. Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland about peak oil. To date, Rep. Bartlett may be the only member of congress who has publicly taken a stance on peak oil. And strangely enough, he’s a Republican.

Where are the Democrats on peak oil? It seems odd that a Republican is standing alone on this issue? And now Bush is talking about alternative fuels?

+++++++++++++++++++++++

Maryland Representative Roscoe Bartlett speaks with David Room of Global Public Media about his special order speeches on peak oil. Mr. Bartlett discusses the response to his speeches and his plans for educating the public. He also discusses ramifications of oil peak, the responsibilities of leadership, and the need for a change in how we define success.

Transcript: http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/transcripts/402
Streaming audio, MP3, and transcript available at: http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/interviews/397

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
renaissanceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
38. Osama Urges for Human Rights
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
39. He should drop his pants so we can read his lips.
Edited on Mon May-16-05 05:56 PM by Dover
Let's see some money and incentives put into place to back that up.
Now that might make it believable.
Bush's Crawford ranch has all kinds of 'alternative energy' things built in.
Apparently he doesn't wish to share those options with the rest of us by creating standards that set the bar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
byronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-16-05 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
43. Next up: A heartfelt investigation into Diebold's switches.
I'm in the middle of Zinn's People's History, and Iraq is the new Philippines. However, there has been progress -- most of them don't openly espouse US imperialism. Oh, wait. Sorry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC