How can we get the US Government to require use of alternative fuels when they're backing Big Oil?

Answer 1

First, we have an oilman as president! Bush has to go first before we can require that alt. fuels be used. Next, the government has to realize that we need to use alt. fuels for both the environment and for the economy. It would be so great to liberate ourselves from the Middle East and make that area return to its position before oil was discovered.

Answer 2

How can you do that without a viable alternative fuel?

All the suggested alternative fuels are small beer and certainly not capable of general availability.

Wind and wave power is severely limited as to what it can produce as a percentage of demand even if you covered the globe with them.

Solar power whilst good for heating water is the most expensive of all the ways to generate electricity, has a very short life and requires the use of batteries etc which require the use of bad chemicals and metals.

Bio fuels offer some hope but will take a long time to develop and even then are likely still to produce significant polution.

Nuclear power offers the best chance of cheap electricity with the minimum of polution but then there is the problem of nuclear waste. There is the possibility of nuclear fussion which would produce very cheap polutionless electricity with virtually no waste either but it's development is many years down the road yet.

Whilst it is good to seek alternative fuels this arguament is actually helping to keep pollution high!!! Yes thats right high!!

If you look at the total polution reduced with the use of alternative energy it is very small.

Compare that to what the automotive industry has done. With the huge strides forward in engine technology engines are many times more efficient in fuel economy and far less poluting.

Look at manufacturing. Electrical devices are again cleaner leaner users of energy. Materials are cleaner to produce, require less energy to produce and are fast becoming recyclable or bio degradable.

Even those huge poluters in the sky are far more fuel efficient and less poluting.

Alternative energy sources will probably not provide a really viable alternative for many many years.

Improving fuel efficiency, better power generation and transmission methods, better power storage etc will produce far more results.

What we should be striving for is evermore energy efficiency and all this talk about alternative energy in it's present state is simply distracting the effort away from where it is really needed.

Thank goodness big business and the producers have recognised it and made the significant advances they have.

Answer 3

First get your facts straight. Not all oilman are republicans. Ted Kennedy makes alot of money off of oil. Alternative fuels will be more accepted when they can produce a solution that will be as affordable as fuel. New resources, new cars, higher prices for cars, conversion solutions developed, new outlets to purchase whatever the new source is, real estate, new buildings, new technology, mass production, new union contracts. These are just off the top of my head. The list is very long. Think a process through before you make blanket statements. Do we need a solution? Yes, but its not going to happen over night.

Answer 4

Once we have a enough vehicles that use alternatives, stations that supply it, and manufactures to make it. It may happen. But you can't force the people to use something you don't have the infrastructure to support it. Bush has put in incentives for companies to research and develop alternative fuels. The Energy Policy Act of 2005. There are cars in use today that run on alternative, but you can't go around the corner to fill em up.Yet. Give it time.

Answer 5

You cannot delegate to another, a right which you yourself lack, and frankly you do not have the right to force me to buy fuel X. Alternative fuels will come of their own, as more and more people buy them, and there will be several, and our voluntary consent utilized in purchasing those products, will determine which one is deemed "best", so if we were to require the implementation of an alternate fuel now, or ever for that matter, you would be coercively restricting the potentially distantly better alternatives. ie. ethanol has a jump start now but in terms of output it is nowhere near as efficient, as super conductive electromagnetic motors, which would certainly fall by the wayside once you mandate the implementation of fuel X. Coercion is not the answer.

Answer 6

Congress needs a major overhaul. Only fools think Democrats aren't also profiting from oil. If companies were given incentives to produce "greener" fuels and we would stop driving the gas guzzlers maybe things will change. Invest in companies willing to work toward alternatives. Are you willing to pay more for greener cars? Are you willing to ride a bike or walk to work? Is that even a possibility?

Answer 7

There's NO-WAY!!! Why do you think the price of gas is so High? Why is is Bush don't even care about our environment. He wants to drill in Alaska. Give me a break!! Bush and dad have to get there cuts along with all the middle people involved. Who's best friends with Saudi Arabia, why Old Mr. Bush !!!! Who Suffers???? We do! and I don't believe we can do anything to change it. Or at least that is what they are counting on. I also believe the gov't knows already the answer to our energy problems and many, many diseases but if they let this information out there will be no more $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ for them.

Answer 8

The people can elect democrats this year for Congress. Call the democrats and volunteer. If you care about rebuilding the United States image in the world, If you care about bringing the Iraq War to a conclusion, If you care about reducing the lack of candor in government, or if you just need a break from politics, Vote for the Democrats in 2006.

Answer 9

You would have to change the leaders in the government since many of them get their wealth from oil (including Pres. Bush).

Answer 10

its not just big oil, its saudi oil. there are other oil and fuel supplies that we refuse to use. even though corn is an inefficient product for fuel compared to sugar cane or other plants, we still use that for economic purposes too.