Comments on: An Energy Plan with More Energy, Lower Prices http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/ Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:54:14 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Spiritof76, New Hamp http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24385 Spiritof76, New Hamp Mon, 30 Mar 2009 18:57:43 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24385 Mr. Sol Shapiro, let us do little math. A 260-MW solar collector based power plant on the drawing boards of Arizona Power will require 3 Square miles of collectors in the AZ desert. It can only support that load during part of the day! If we assume that the plant can handle 8 hours at full power (generous assumption)every day, 365 days a year, it will require over 6000 square miles to equal the entire power production of the US. The only trouble is we have to be able to produce that power continuously day and night. May be we can import power from Australia at night? What is the environmental damage as a result of absorption of so much power without some of it naturally being reflected back into space? Mr. Sol Shapiro, let us do little math. A 260-MW solar collector based power plant on the drawing boards of Arizona Power will require 3 Square miles of collectors in the AZ desert. It can only support that load during part of the day!

If we assume that the plant can handle 8 hours at full power (generous assumption)every day, 365 days a year, it will require over 6000 square miles to equal the entire power production of the US. The only trouble is we have to be able to produce that power continuously day and night. May be we can import power from Australia at night?

What is the environmental damage as a result of absorption of so much power without some of it naturally being reflected back into space?

]]> By: Dan Ulseth http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24352 Dan Ulseth Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:05:55 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24352 First: For Sol Shapiro - "midwest wind" would be predicated on the radical environmentalists reneging on one of their cherished planks - namely, "open spaces". They will no sooner allow the deployment of thousands of wind generators over hundreds of thousands of acres, no matter how unproductive, unsightly or otherwise underutilized than they will acknowledge that nuclear power, emitting NO CO2, is the most energy dense, reliable, consistent, abundant and safe form of energy currently available. And I don't buy into the CO2 = pollution scam, either. I say the previous in light of the fact that I stand to benefit handsomely when our new, more efficient solar panels are brought to market. Morally, I cannot justify my personal financial "windfall" at the expense of my fellow Americans paying more for their energy, not to mention the delay in advancing less-developed nations with their energy grid. Second: To follow this path of restrictions, limitations, and handcuffing of our domestic energy producers - who are under the watchful eye of any number of agencies and environmental groups - is equivalent to national suicide. Government cannot mandate new technologies into existence, no matter how much money you throw at inventors! First: For Sol Shapiro – "midwest wind" would be predicated on the radical environmentalists reneging on one of their cherished planks – namely, "open spaces". They will no sooner allow the deployment of thousands of wind generators over hundreds of thousands of acres, no matter how unproductive, unsightly or otherwise underutilized than they will acknowledge that nuclear power, emitting NO CO2, is the most energy dense, reliable, consistent, abundant and safe form of energy currently available. And I don't buy into the CO2 = pollution scam, either.

I say the previous in light of the fact that I stand to benefit handsomely when our new, more efficient solar panels are brought to market. Morally, I cannot justify my personal financial "windfall" at the expense of my fellow Americans paying more for their energy, not to mention the delay in advancing less-developed nations with their energy grid.

Second: To follow this path of restrictions, limitations, and handcuffing of our domestic energy producers – who are under the watchful eye of any number of agencies and environmental groups – is equivalent to national suicide. Government cannot mandate new technologies into existence, no matter how much money you throw at inventors!

]]> By: Sol Shapiro, Aurora, http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24209 Sol Shapiro, Aurora, Sun, 29 Mar 2009 17:09:35 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24209 First: Why has my comment of March 28 not been posted? Second: For Mel Shapiro (no relation): For electric generation solar thermal with storage and geothermal can provide all U.S. electrical energy; generate in the southwest where least expensive and distribute on a national grid - which would include midwest wind. First: Why has my comment of March 28 not been posted?

Second: For Mel Shapiro (no relation): For electric generation solar thermal with storage and geothermal can provide all U.S. electrical energy; generate in the southwest where least expensive and distribute on a national grid – which would include midwest wind.

]]> By: Mel Shapiro, Eastsou http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24198 Mel Shapiro, Eastsou Sun, 29 Mar 2009 14:14:47 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24198 When the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics are understood it becomes obvious that the entire concept of "alternative energy" is a cruel hoax. The only "alternative" to fossil fuel based energy is nuclear energy. The only alternative to nuclear energy is fewer people, far fewer people, consuming fossil fuel. When the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics are understood it becomes obvious that the entire concept of "alternative energy" is a cruel hoax.

The only "alternative" to fossil fuel based energy is nuclear energy. The only alternative to nuclear energy is fewer people, far fewer people, consuming fossil fuel.

]]> By: PA Pundits - International http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24177 PA Pundits - International Sun, 29 Mar 2009 09:03:15 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24177 <strong>An Energy Plan With More Energy, Lower Prices...</strong> Nick Loris. Republican leaders released their budget alternative yesterday, and it came under much criticism since it failed to include any hard numbers. On the bright side, though, the Republicans’ energy budget proposal doesn’t require mu... An Energy Plan With More Energy, Lower Prices…

Nick Loris.
Republican leaders released their budget alternative yesterday, and it came under much criticism since it failed to include any hard numbers. On the bright side, though, the Republicans’ energy budget proposal doesn’t require mu…

]]> By: William, Louisiana http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24127 William, Louisiana Sat, 28 Mar 2009 13:41:48 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24127 I live in Louisiana and I know that there are over twelve hundred producing oil rigs in the Gulf Of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana. There are also many new exploration rigs down there that are producing oil from huge new finds, some as much as 6,000 barrels a day. But because of Federal regulations these producing wells cannot go into full production because that would require the owners of the well to take out a different kind of license and a bunch more money paid to the government. Nancy Pelosi has already told the producers no new wells will be allowed to go into full production. There are three, maybe more, wells down there that could produce over a million barrels a day between them if they could only get permission to go into full production thus sending much needed oil to our refineries lowering the cost of gasoline at the pump for millions of motorist. This restriction of access to America's natural resources is the biggest travesty in our history. And it is also a direct attack on the livlihoods of not only the oil producers but ordinary small businesses that would benefit directly from this oil production. Further restriction of the creation of people's livlihoods by the government does nothing but purposely reduce the money available to those oil producing states that could lower individual taxes that have to be made up somehow without the oil revenues that could come in from these wells if the government would allow them to fully produce. It would also bring in more Federal tax, but appearently the present administration wants to tax us in other nonproducing ways that do nothing but take us further down the road to debt and loss of liberty. I live in Louisiana and I know that there are over twelve hundred producing oil rigs in the Gulf Of Mexico off the coast of Louisiana. There are also many new exploration rigs down there that are producing oil from huge new finds, some as much as 6,000 barrels a day. But because of Federal regulations these producing wells cannot go into full production because that would require the owners of the well to take out a different kind of license and a bunch more money paid to the government. Nancy Pelosi has already told the producers no new wells will be allowed to go into full production. There are three, maybe more, wells down there that could produce over a million barrels a day between them if they could only get permission to go into full production thus sending much needed oil to our refineries lowering the cost of gasoline at the pump for millions of motorist. This restriction of access to America's natural resources is the biggest travesty in our history. And it is also a direct attack on the livlihoods of not only the oil producers but ordinary small businesses that would benefit directly from this oil production. Further restriction of the creation of people's livlihoods by the government does nothing but purposely reduce the money available to those oil producing states that could lower individual taxes that have to be made up somehow without the oil revenues that could come in from these wells if the government would allow them to fully produce. It would also bring in more Federal tax, but appearently the present administration wants to tax us in other nonproducing ways that do nothing but take us further down the road to debt and loss of liberty.

]]> By: Leslie Hollenbeck,Wi http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24124 Leslie Hollenbeck,Wi Sat, 28 Mar 2009 12:46:00 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24124 The opening of all of our government lands and offshore areas to immediate exploration and environmentally safe drilling is in the best interest of our country. The income, through leasing fees,taxes and royalties, over time will go a long way to pay for congress's financial foolishness in reguards to sub-prime mortgages and the bailouts. Why is no-one pushing this idea? The opening of all of our government lands and offshore areas to immediate exploration and environmentally safe drilling is in the best interest of our country. The income, through leasing fees,taxes and royalties, over time will go a long way to pay for congress's financial foolishness in reguards to sub-prime mortgages and the bailouts.

Why is no-one pushing this idea?

]]> By: Sol Shapiro, Aurora, http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24118 Sol Shapiro, Aurora, Sat, 28 Mar 2009 10:50:31 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24118 Coal-to-liquid should be a part of our NOW energy policy; to offset imported oil. A proven technology used by Germany during WW2 and currently producing 150.000 barrels per day in South Africa, it can be produced for about $60 per barrel. Loan guarantees for first of a kind plants are needed - including a Baard plant in Wellsville, Ohio seeking $2.3 billion. Coal-to-liquid should be a part of our NOW energy policy; to offset imported oil. A proven technology used by Germany during WW2 and currently producing 150.000 barrels per day in South Africa, it can be produced for about $60 per barrel. Loan guarantees for first of a kind plants are needed – including a Baard plant in Wellsville, Ohio seeking $2.3 billion.

]]> By: Barb -mn http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/an-energy-plan-with-more-energy-lower-prices/#comment-24076 Barb -mn Fri, 27 Mar 2009 21:49:23 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=4551#comment-24076 Guess what, Mr. President? Your idea is inefficient, preposterous, irrational, unreasonable, senseless, frivolous, wasteful and horrendous. You're a liar, thief, fear mongerer, freedom hater, race hater and (if everyone plays their cards) soon to be busted! Why are you so selfish and hypocritical to set your thermostat at 78 degrees? Taking advantage of taxpayers everywhere you can! Natural resources must continue to be used in the manner it is to substantiate human survival. If alternative fuel was efficient, the private sector would take it on without government intervention. I'm missing out on all the proper intelligence some people bragged to say you have... Guess what, Mr. President? Your idea is inefficient, preposterous, irrational, unreasonable, senseless, frivolous, wasteful and horrendous. You're a liar, thief, fear mongerer, freedom hater, race hater and (if everyone plays their cards) soon to be busted! Why are you so selfish and hypocritical to set your thermostat at 78 degrees? Taking advantage of taxpayers everywhere you can!

Natural resources must continue to be used in the manner it is to substantiate human survival. If alternative fuel was efficient, the private sector would take it on without government intervention.

I'm missing out on all the proper intelligence some people bragged to say you have…

]]>