Here's one you'll really hate. If Reagan would have stuck with Jimmy Carter's energy plan, we would not be facing any of the crap we are now.
A lot of dangerous chemicals in fertilizer have been removed over the years. Using corn for fuel is the most stupid idea of the century. I'll give you that one. I think people who want off of oil are your friends. Now put your silly SUV in the garage.
2007-12-16 09:28:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7
·
3⤊
2⤋
I have always been concerned about ethanol production. Nothing is free. I am more worried about the water table in the midwest because of all the irrigation. So, once again you missed the mark and assume that environmentalists don't think of these things.
2007-12-16 09:26:22
·
answer #2
·
answered by beren 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
Actually both of those technologies were pushed for by the right-wingers who have been campaigning to remove our dependence on foreign oil.
As far as ethanol is concerned, it was pushed for, by liberals, decades ago, before it was obsolete. We should now, already be driving hydrogen fuel cell-powered vehicles. liberals have claimed that ethanol should be made from agricultural waste, which there is plenty of. But makign things in that manner doesn't make stock holders near as happy.
Hybrids are the Bush answer to conservation by keeping us dependant on fossil fuels, but not using as much, so prices can be cranked higher to increase margins.
2007-12-16 10:13:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by avail_skillz 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Everyone is so eager to find alternate fuels that they don't look at the cost and the environmental impact. I would like to see some numbers showing the actual cost to produce ethanol and what it's impact on the environment will be.
2007-12-16 09:34:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by hdean45 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
If only it were just [1/2 of the country] the Liberals; it's not. We should all worry that the same lunatics that have choked off our oil-based energy are now going to turn our food into fuel.
2007-12-16 09:34:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I believe that libs, many moderates like me, and a few cons do care about our environment. Yes ethanol from corn is a hoax perpetrated by spinelss politicians, but ethanol from other sources is a viable alternative to purchasing expensive oil from hostile nations. Brazil has all of its cars running on an ethanol fuel made from sugar cane, so it can be done.
You are being too cynical, and negative, we can reduce our dependence on fossil fuels without harming our environment.
Fight Global Warming: http://www.fightglobalwarming.com/
US Conference of Mayors Climate: http://usmayors.org/climateprotection/
Save Energy Organization: http://www.energyhog.com
25 WAYS to Curb climate Change:
http://www.parade.com/articles/web_exclusives/06-25-2006/Climate_Change_Tips
2007-12-16 09:23:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Shane 7
·
4⤊
2⤋
I've never been in favor of ethanol. It uses more energy to make it than octane-based gasoline. Toyota Priuses are just more efficient vehicles. I thought Republicans liked efficiency, no?
Switch to nuclear power!
2007-12-16 09:31:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Of course they don't care. You forgot rule #2 of dealing w liberals: It's their intentions you are supposed to applaud while ignoring the false logic and general silliness they display along the way. (Rule #1 is: You are not allowed to tell them they are wrong. Ever. If you do, you are a racist, homophobe, sexist, denier, etc... Insert your own lib catchphrase here.)
2007-12-16 09:41:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Do neo-cons know that there the ones giving all those subsidies to coal, oil and nuke power, The libs want those subsidies to go to solar, wind and geo-thermal but we take what we can get for now.
2007-12-16 09:29:17
·
answer #9
·
answered by region50 6
·
2⤊
2⤋
What is the source of your information ?
2007-12-16 09:25:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Herb 5
·
2⤊
1⤋