What is Digg?Sponsored by wix.com
The Ultimate Flash Website Design Tool view!
wix.com - Design a stunning website in 10 easy steps.
89 Comments
- punx777, on 10/16/2007, -0/+24Um... I would just like to meet who doesn't support renewable energy?
- steinalec, on 10/16/2007, -1/+18NO *****. who the ***** DOESNT want renewable energy.
- Dokument, on 10/16/2007, -1/+12chuck norris.
- Bukowsky, on 10/16/2007, -5/+16I'm not surprised that the % is so high. However, I don't think Ethanol is the answer. I think it will help, but not solve the climate change crisis.
great submit! - kweee, on 10/16/2007, -2/+11I hate renewable energy so much. If I burn something for energy, I expect it to stay dead! ;)
- navinjohnson, on 10/16/2007, -0/+8My guess is this poll has a 12% margin of error
- Ajajadude, on 10/16/2007, -1/+9I was thinking the same thing. What, were the other 20% or so thinking "You know, I really like the smell and sight of that ozone cloud hanging over LA. And you haven't lived until you've spent $4.00/gallon on gas!"
- wetmetalthong, on 10/16/2007, -1/+9go hydrogen or water! or just electricity! too bad we can't power our cars with *****, though, because that is definitely our number 1 export in america
- graviplana, on 10/16/2007, -2/+9Yes, Ethanol isn't the answer. Ethanol will simply never provide enough for projected global energy consumption needs. However, the desire to change and the good intentions of people are worth mentioning. Go Hydrogen!
- lazydrumhead, on 10/16/2007, -1/+8what the heck is up with the other 12%
- lateralus, on 10/16/2007, -0/+7This means 12% polled have significant Big Gas & Energy in their portfolios....and have a Fox News-level of education, but that goes without saying.
- ZenMojo, on 10/16/2007, -0/+5Considering that we're artificially keeping food costs in this country up by subsidizing agriculture to keep it from destabilizing the market with cheap, plentiful food, I'm not particularly concerned about food costs. It's the toxification and deforestation of our environment from growing corn that's my biggest concern.
- Ajajadude, on 10/16/2007, -0/+5***** Chuck Norris.
- hellyes, on 10/16/2007, -1/+5100%-88%=12%
12!=20 - nihilite, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3I don't think any one solution needs to stand alone. We need a diversified solution. Bio-diesel, ethanol, solar, natural gas, CTL, etc.. The great thing is that both political parties stand to benefit from "going green". Liberals can save the environment, conservatives to save money on oil and ease dependence on the middle east.
- b0rna, on 10/16/2007, -1/+4only 0% are willing to try it.
- MrFisty, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3This just in: 12% of people are idiots.
- DavidYeah, on 10/17/2007, -1/+4You cannot simply implement laws that will "eliminate personal consumerism." The culture that you impose those laws on will reject the laws and the politicians that put them in place. The culture has to want that kind of change enough to do it on its own. Good luck making that happen in America.
- sangjmoon, on 10/16/2007, -2/+5A better question is how much are you willing to spend extra for renewable energy? For the vast majority of people, they vote with their wallet by showing they will only switch over when the cost of the fuel and supporting infrastructure reaches the break even point of using current fossil fuels. The key word here is infrastructure. It gets extremely complicated and expensive when you are talking about the whole of the USA. Those who support alternative fuels tend to ignore the infrastructure needs which is why our bridges are falling down and past attempts at alternative fuels, even subsidized, have not gained steam. Fossil fuel prices will increase naturally because they are running out. The worst thing we can do is subsidize or mandate the use of alternative fuels for a protracted period. Any government interference should be temporary or it sets up the industry for a fall when the crutches are not enough to prop them up. Think of the US auto industry as an example.
- mclumber1, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3If and when oil runs out, you better bet that Big Oil will invest in renewable energy sources. Why the hell wouldn't they?
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3You should run for office in CA, you'd fit right in. Don't worry about substance or learning any of the science, that will take away from campaign time.
- mclumber1, on 10/16/2007, -1/+4I forget which one, but one of the big oil companies is actually the second largest producer of renewable energy in America.
- shamanlife, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3What sacrifices? That's just an excuse given by those that either don't understand what renewables are, or don't want to lose their profits from the current selling of fossil fuels. In actuality, using renewables along with other forms, such as; solar, or nuclear, there is more than enough energy for everyone to splurge on the over abundance of energy, some even "free".
- angryredplanet, on 10/16/2007, -0/+3Well, "cow power" is being looked at...
http://www.primidi.com/2005/05/12.html - GorfTron, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2I rode the bus once, it smelled like pee.
- NapalmNewt, on 10/20/2007, -0/+2Not to mention the 85% support for medical advances.
- lateralus, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2I'm 14 and 3 months! sux0r!
- zeffy5, on 10/19/2007, -2/+4Sure, people "support" it and are in favor of it, but how many will actually make sacrifices in order for it to happen?
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 10/16/2007, -1/+3Hell yeah I support, I just don't support whacky ass super expensive gimmicks that don't supply much energy like Solar Power; while ignoring Nuclear (where I live).
- Winboloer, on 10/16/2007, -0/+2You'll pay for this Captain Planet!
- NonLeftistDiggr, on 10/16/2007, -1/+3"eliminate personal consumerism."
That would certainly quadruple the NRA membership over night. I really would enjoy having my scheduled meeting with my local personal consumerism parole officer. - Logicexe, on 10/19/2007, -0/+2What sacrifices would the common person have to do for viable alternative fuels? The only thing they could really do is go back to school and take some chemistry and engineering courses to try and help figure out some alternative to oil that can scale up to fulfill our current energy needs and beyond. It's not a matter of how many people there are on the bandwagon, the bandwagon isn't built yet.
- lolwaffle, on 11/03/2008, -0/+2I'm puzzled too at how some people wouldn't want renewable energy. I'm sure coal and oil workers aren't in favor of the layoffs that would ensue; I don't blame them. Then you have people who think wind turbines are ugly or kill birds left and right, etc. Then you have people totally against it, just because certain politicians are for it. I'm sure there are a few with the "Why save the planet, I'll be dead in x years" mentality as well. Hmm, what else?
- JQP123, on 10/18/2007, -0/+2Hydrogen solves nothing. Widespread use would actually increase our overall energy needs due to inefficiencies involved in manufacturing and distribution. Generating hydrogen by electrolysis wastes lots of power on the front end. Using a fuel cell to burn hydrogen on the back end is also not very efficient. All things considered, hydrogen is a hoax.
- NeoNightmareX, on 10/16/2007, -2/+4People who work for and/or have stock in major oil companies? Just a possibility.
- bdbr, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Where I live, individuals can voluntarily pay a bit extra and have all our electricity come from only renewable sources (its only about 8% more). Maybe we should at least be getting this easy step out of the way, while we figure out how to fuel cars with renewable sources.
(and yes, I pay the extra fee) - fuckinhell, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Thinking it's good and actually supporting it are two completely different things. My guess is most people will not be willing to sacrifice anything to make it happen. People always expect someone else to fix the problem but only if it doesn't inconvenience THEM.
- mre5765, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1And in other news, 90% of the public think faster than light travel is a good thing, and 76% support transmutation of lead into gold.
- NapalmNewt, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1At least it would reduce the use of limited oil resources, we're used to corruption anyway.
- Logicexe, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1There are a ton of geologists who used to work for oil companies claiming that we're literally in the last decade or two of cheap oil. The party's over, if they have an alternative they need to put it out now.
- NapalmNewt, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1We can always use candles, they've been around for a while...
- NapalmNewt, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1What does the other 12% expect us to use for energy in 200 years? We're running out of oil, coal, and whales to burn.
- nihilite, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1All the majors have ethanol and/or biodiesel operations. BP (bp), Chevron (cvx), etc.
- nihilite, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Why are you digging this down. Read the 10K's of BP, Chevron, or any of the major oil co's. They are spending billions on developing biofuels.
As oil wells are pumped out, it is becoming much more expensive to pull oil out of the ground. that is why companies like haliburton (oil service companies that don't sell or keep oil, they just help find ways to get it out of the ground) are getting so rich right now.
A bunch of oil exec's even jumped ship and started their own biofuel company - Nova Biosource Fuels (NBF). That company has over 230 million barrels of bio diesel in the works right now.
Biofuel is coming up in a big way and i think the oil companies are finally seeing it as a profitable venture. - Twee, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Of course renewable energy is going to help, but ethanol isn't the way to do it.
- inactive, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Talk is cheap. Everyone knows that 18% of statistics are just made up!
- Logicexe, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1People seem to have some weird view of the market place. As if there are millions of entrepreneurs willing to practically give stuff away. Everyone sells stuff at the market price. They might sometimes undercut their competitors but that'll cut into their profits, which means it won't be done all the time and won't be by a huge margin. Business people are greedy, if they can get $20 for their product they will get $20 for their product, they're not going to charge $15 just to be good guys.
- kday, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1Hydrogen is not the future IMO. It just takes much more energy to isolate hydrogen than you can get from it. Of course, if we used nuclear power plants as a power source to isolate hydrogen, it could become a viable option, and help clean up the environment. Hydrogen extracted via electrolysis (the typical way hydrogen is isolated) isn't really an energy source per se. Think of it more like a energy carrier -- a way of storing energy.
Ethanol (from corn) on the other hand, isn't the answer either since it only yields about 35% more energy than it takes to produce it. However, extraction of ethanol from other crops (such as certain types of weeds or sugar cane) is much easier, and could become a viable alternative. - nihilite, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1gas will be more than $4 a gallon! Right now the crack spread (profit refiners make turning oil into gas) is very very thin. It is expect to go up several hundred percent over the next year or so. Gas is about $2.80 now. When oil doubles and the refiner margins triple, how expensive do you think gas will be?
- Logicexe, on 10/16/2007, -0/+1The best evidence we have for the inviability of most alternative fuel schemes is that no maybe oil companies have picked them up yet. Do you really think these huge, multi billion dollar companies are going to just roll over and die after peak oil? They know it's coming, they've known for years, they're ***** their pants over what may happen in the next decade or two. If they had a viable alternative they'd trumpet it as loudly as they could. They would proclaim themselves to be the kings of sustainability and environmentally friendliness. They would advertise their product as the end of our addiction to foreign oil.
There isn't anyone more interested in viable alternative energy sources than the big oil companies. -
Show 51 - 89 of 89 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is