Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fortune.com/CNN Money - Doomsday on Energy Independence

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 » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:06 PM
Original message
Fortune.com/CNN Money - Doomsday on Energy Independence
Plugged in

Energy independence is a disaster in the making


It's been a rallying cry since the 1970s -- but it could doom the economy, the environment and our position in the world.
By Justin Fox, FORTUNE editor-at-large
March 1, 2006: 11:24 AM EST


NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - It may be one of the most dangerous phrases in the English language. It certainly is one of the most expensive.

I speak of "energy independence," a rallying cry since the oil crisis of the 1970s and one that has been getting a ton of ink (and pixels) lately, especially since President Bush brought up the subject in his State of the Union address.

<snip>


Investing in R&D and handing out scholarships for science and engineering students are good things, mind you, and many of those calling for energy independence are driven by similarly wholesome motives. But I'm a big believer that words count, and the words "energy independence" are potentially disastrous ones.

To put it most starkly: We could have energy independence tomorrow if Congress simply slapped a huge tariff on energy imports (would $250 per barrel of oil do it?). Meanwhile, skyrocketing fuel prices would shift the economy into reverse, throw tens of millions of Americans out of work, and what oil and natural gas we have left under our territory would be rapidly depleted.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/28/news/economy/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm


What happened to American ingenuity, where would Ford or any of the early inventors of American business be if they waited on Congress to invest in their idea. Waiting for a corporate handout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kenny blankenship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
1. Relax. Energy independence is like Bush going to Mars
he doesn't mean it and it won't happen anyway for a host of economic and technical reasons.
I promise you President Fuckwad has already forgotten he ever said anything about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChairmanAgnostic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
2. no different than the doomsday voices talking about Edison and his
evil lightbulbs. All the gas lighters would be out of work, electricity was an unknown danger, and besides, the technology we knew was better than risking our future on something untried.

this guy has the same backwards attitude and analysis. It is as though his mindset is stuck on oil, and therefore there will never be low cost, low polution, efficient energy source. He is full of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The problem with most business journals (Forbes, Fortune) is that...
they are not really about the free market. These RAGS are dedicated to promoting the well being of those who benefit from the status quo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. There wont.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
5. He seems to think that our imported oil will last forever and ever...
But if he wants to keep burning fossil fuels, I've got some disastrous phrases for him: "THC shutdown" or "Hurricane Katrina" or "Coral bleaching" or "bark beetles" or "extended drought" or "crop failures" or "permafrost methane" ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spag68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
6. energy
an elusive thing. we can do this, I've posted this before. I personally worked in 1974-5 south of Pgh. u of pgh&gov. pilot plant for coal to gas. when we were done it produced methane competitive with 15$ a barrel, so I know it could be done much better today. so don't let them claim there's no way out. Also get over nuke plants. they are much better then you think and much safer then you think
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
n2doc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
7. It doesn't really matter what they think
Oil or its equivalent will eventually be 250 a barrel or more. The only variable is where the money will go- to other countries or to US companies producing alternative fuels. And how fast it will happen.
No one thought that $60/barrel oil was sustainable.....the slow boiling/squeezing of the American Consumer has begun...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Yeah, but like he says, "words matter."
I don't know about anybody else, but I just got a migraine from the irony of that rube talking about how we'd risk $250/barrel oil and climate change (and dogs and cats living together!) if we were so foolish as to pursue (gasp) energy independence.

For his touching faith in the Eternal Well Of OPEC OIL, I think I shall award him a Tinkerbell:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spag68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. energy
at the risk of repeating myself. we can make OIL PRODUCTS FROM COAL FAR CHEAPER THEN 250$ oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spag68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-01-06 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. oil
I would like to say also that oil in our future, if we have a future , will be far more valuable for it's prtrochems. so burning it is stupid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phantom power Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-02-06 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. no doubt, but the CO2 will kill us all.
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, 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy 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