On the subject of energy policy, MNB user Chris Colombana wrote:
I normally agree with your position on most things, and I am as hopeful as anyone that we can get past the ugly finger pointing brought on by the environmental/energy debate, but I couldn't bite my tongue strongly enough on this one...
You stated that the current state of America's poor approach toward embracing more energy efficient practices are "both parties' fault".
Though that may be true for the political moment, please look back over the decades and you'll see that one of the political parties has consistently pushed toward energy efficiency and reducing our reliance on non-renewable resources and the other has blatantly turned the other cheek on the issue, choosing to bury their collective heads in the sand. And I'm talking prior to the year 2000, when it was much less of an in-your-face issue but just the discussion sparked by those intelligent and brave enough to look down the road a bit and see a potential hazard.
After all the name calling and eternal damnation you've been wished, I'd of hoped that you'd not forget that!
For the moment, at least, I see very little political courage when it comes to having a real vision about our energy future. Wish it weren’t so, but there it is. It is never too late to change, though.
Another MNB user wrote:
I wonder why we have not put more money and effort into developing super conducting materials that super conduct at near room temperatures? It deals less with how we make the energy and more with how we use it but the net benefits are similar.
And another MNB user wrote:
The industry requirement on gas mileage for trucks is the way our system should work. Too many of you want the government to pass more laws. Instead the marketplace will work if we let it.
I agree…but I want industry to take the lead by being even more visionary than government…not more defensive.
One MNB user had some thoughts about the essays this week by Michael Sansolo and me “looking back” on 2008:
What I like is that you and Michael have both kept a very positive and optimistic look at what could be in 2009. Your articles are somewhat comedic since I carry a less optimistic view of things to come this year. I also am a bit more of a realist and don't think that we will get to read these same comments in January 2009.
I hope I am wrong.
I wouldn’t bet the house that Michael and I will be proved right.
And I hope I am wrong.
I normally agree with your position on most things, and I am as hopeful as anyone that we can get past the ugly finger pointing brought on by the environmental/energy debate, but I couldn't bite my tongue strongly enough on this one...
You stated that the current state of America's poor approach toward embracing more energy efficient practices are "both parties' fault".
Though that may be true for the political moment, please look back over the decades and you'll see that one of the political parties has consistently pushed toward energy efficiency and reducing our reliance on non-renewable resources and the other has blatantly turned the other cheek on the issue, choosing to bury their collective heads in the sand. And I'm talking prior to the year 2000, when it was much less of an in-your-face issue but just the discussion sparked by those intelligent and brave enough to look down the road a bit and see a potential hazard.
After all the name calling and eternal damnation you've been wished, I'd of hoped that you'd not forget that!
For the moment, at least, I see very little political courage when it comes to having a real vision about our energy future. Wish it weren’t so, but there it is. It is never too late to change, though.
Another MNB user wrote:
I wonder why we have not put more money and effort into developing super conducting materials that super conduct at near room temperatures? It deals less with how we make the energy and more with how we use it but the net benefits are similar.
And another MNB user wrote:
The industry requirement on gas mileage for trucks is the way our system should work. Too many of you want the government to pass more laws. Instead the marketplace will work if we let it.
I agree…but I want industry to take the lead by being even more visionary than government…not more defensive.
One MNB user had some thoughts about the essays this week by Michael Sansolo and me “looking back” on 2008:
What I like is that you and Michael have both kept a very positive and optimistic look at what could be in 2009. Your articles are somewhat comedic since I carry a less optimistic view of things to come this year. I also am a bit more of a realist and don't think that we will get to read these same comments in January 2009.
I hope I am wrong.
I wouldn’t bet the house that Michael and I will be proved right.
And I hope I am wrong.
- KC's View:
