Obama pushes research fund, seeks common ground on energy policy

“He pumped in $90 Billion”?How do you arrive at that number?Sounds a little high.When it is just research that is usually a good investment he has gone way off track on loan garantees.The Audi G-tronA-3 already uses natural gas and gasoline.More research is needed to bring advanced nuclear fission to market such as LFTR,NGNP,FHR, all of which we invented and China is bringing to market and will be selling us in ten years.

Has it not occurred to our dear “leader” that we now have the most plentiful proven reserves on the planet? Is it lost on him that cheap energy is a boon to consumers, to business, to exports, to competitiveness, and thus to jobs, economic growth, and even his precious tax revenues?

Has he realized that renewables are not efficient enough to be scalable and that he could use the taxes from these projects and the general economic growth commensurate with it to fund more R&D for the future of renewables?

It’s truly baffling how consistently liberals let their ideals supersede logical reasoning…

Lets keep pumping money for research into alternate energy projects as the loss of billions brought on by Obama’s failures continues to add to our national debt. We have natural resourses available but our King doesn’t have the desire to utilize them. The insanity continues.

What good is clean air to a generation that is born, lives, and dies so far in debt, presonally and publicly, they will never see the light of day? Somebody’s, or everybody’s, priorities are completely screwed up.

jaham –

Renewable energy sources are not highly efficient right now because it’s a new technology; that’s why we want to invest in research – to improve that technology.

Surely you must realize that our efficiency in extracting energy from burning fossil fuels has increased in the last century, precisely because we invested in research? Even still, ask any engineering student and they will tell you that combustion engines are highly inefficient.

And furthermore, discovering that we have larger reserves than we previously though does not mean that fossil fuels are suddenly renewable. It is inevitable that they will eventually become depleted.

Research is the only way out of the poisoned, greedy, violent, mess that is humanity’s reliance on fossil fuels. And the last thing we need is that toxic dead-end-street to end in reliance on nuclear fission.

Solar energy, then hydrogen, then fusion. Invest in a future and not killing for and stealing oil. I have read the final cost will be on the order of 1.4 Trillion with interest for the war in Iraq. Our war for the Saudis and Kuwaitis and Big Oil profits. Absolute idiocy and greed, and treason imo.

Candidate Obama promised to promote clean coal technology. Once a liar always a liar.

Being a shill for oil makes no one valorous or noble. It’s just greed. On this topic the president is correct, but the amount he wants to spend is rather miserly, even if the GOPer shills rant otherwise. $2B dollars is less than one percent of what we spent on protecting our oil interests in the middle east. Fiscally responsible people would be looking to get energy production back in the USA.

Oh, yes, the fracked oil and gas is nice, at least from a domestic production stand point, but watch where it is in ten years. While some will make money on it, it is not a long term solution. Both the oil and gas production capacities have been wildly over estimated to create a frenzy around the topic as an investment. It is like our stock market though, bubble prone. A steady and patient development of these resources would be wise, but then that’s just not exciting enough for the gambling thrill seekers of the US, we’d rather be giant failures than to have to think rationally and act in a controlled and measure fashion.

@jaham; Put down the pipe, turn off the radio, switch to a different channel other than fox. What your regurgitating is GOP campaign rhetoric that is flat out wrong and dangerous. Peak oil has come and gone. “The days of cheap oil are gone”. Despite what your talking heads say Pres. Obama is looking out for the US. This is more than a matter of $$$, it’s a matter of national security. So, as my mother likes to say “If you don’t have anything constructive to say, keep your thoughts to yourself”. All the negativity the GOP/Tea bagger’s are absorbing is counter productive and down right dangerous. Do some research, think for yourselves.

brotherkenny4
So have you paid back $147,000+ that obama has rung up in your name? That is your share, pay it or quit supporting him. I assume you are a tax payer. Spin it baby spin it!

@UsofRationality…I basically agree with everything you said.

I am all for funding R&D on renewables so we can be the leader in it. I want a robust green energy industry here domestically. I want to have the cutting edge technology.

that said, I think we should also be exploiting our energy resources that are available today to spur economic growth, increase global competitiveness, lower energy costs, create energy industry jobs and as a source of revenues to help fund said renewable R&D.

The two goals are not mutually exclusive.

@yougoyo…What I have to say is quite constructive actually.

Peak oil and campaign rhetoric has nothing to do with the fact that new technology has allowed America to access what is now considered the most sizable energy reserves on the planet.

I believe we should be utilizing those resources full bore: exporting, lowering energy costs, bolstering our energy industry and reaping the job and economic growth commensurate with it.

If Obama was “looking out for the US” he would support a strong domestic (“fossil”) energy industry and the tapping of those resources while also funding renewables research so that we can lead the world in that arena as well.

Don’t be so narrow minded; turn off the Rachel Maddow and think for yourself.

@brotherkenny said: “Being a shill for oil makes no one valorous or noble. It’s just greed.”

But being a shill for renewables while neglecting our proven reserves does?

“Oh, yes, the fracked oil and gas is nice, at least from a domestic production stand point, but watch where it is in ten years. While some will make money on it, it is not a long term solution. Both the oil and gas production capacities have been wildly over estimated to create a frenzy around the topic as an investment.”

So why not pursue it for 10 years and allow us some time to make renewables more scalable?

And how clean is Illinois air?

http://video.foxnews.com/v/2224797563001/congressman-confronts-obama-over-national-debt/?intcmp=obnetwork

What about solving the problem? Waterwheel hydro very good.

You people posting against renewable energy spending need to realize that our top engineers in renewable energy are leaving the U.S., mainly to China, due to the lack of funding and over regulation in the U.S.

Renewable Energy is a cutting edge technology that will fuel job growth for decades, but as usual Washington Congressmen are only worried about lining their pockets today rather than protecting U.S. prominence long term…

Solar is already approaching grid parity. I paid $ 3.50 a watt three years ago, now I pay under $ 0.60 watt for solar panels.
Thin film continues to improve, cut the oil industry tax breaks and continue to grow renewables.

We has to move from fossil based energy to renewables.

This is great news. There are currently more than a dozen alternative fuels that are viable options for ending our addiction to oil. If we allow for competition among oil and these new replacement fuels, we are paving the way for cheaper fuel and the ability to choose what we put into our cars. This is something that can garner support from both parties, and is a stepping stone in creating a future with more choice, and cleaner, more efficient fuels!