Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.
Article Source: Think ProgressWhen times get tough, companies often fall back on an old familiar phrase: “we just need to do more with less.” That usually applies to human resources. But it’s equally important with natural resources.
As it turns out, “green” companies in California that do more with fewer natural resources fared much better than companies in other sectors during the worst of America’s economic troubles — more than doubling the performance of the broader economy.
Stephen Lacey
Goes with the experience Mass. had in another seed you posted. And it fits in line with the results Germany is finding with its investments in green energy. Seems as a country we are slow to learn and cowardly when it comes to exploring new technologies and attitudes. So much for priding ourselves on innovation and entrepreneurship. Seems most are afraid of changing with the times and reality.
#1 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 1:36 PM ESTExcellently put !
I'd like to put it another way... many are afraid of what 'might be' than what 'actually is' at the end of the tunnel. The World has proven that Renewable energy/alternative energy is proven to be a positive direction to go in, and many countries such as Germany are excelling to go with a full range of technology to get off fossil and nuclear eventually...They have committed themselves not to erect/build any more nuclear power plants..and once the ones they have online are offline that's it. I salute Germany for their efforts, and I hope they are successful ...and Europe with their offshore wind turbines.
People here are pushed and pulled by Koch and Norquist, and those with creative fantasies.. to dismiss renewable energy.. although I can understand.. there isn't any working demonstration of say.. what I wrote once before... a working situation of 10-20 homes where the people who are dismissing it can logically grab hold of it in their mind's eye, that will prove that it actually works.. Some people can grasp it without display of fact, but many people who are naive and cannot grab hold of it.. need to see it ..That is where we are.. and as long as we are here...they will have a sense of it but no actual understanding of what it can do for them by benefiting their pockets.
It's all a god damned liberal conspiracy to put down my dream of a HMMV in every driveway and the fine american ideal of the 5 gallon to the mile automobile I tell ya.
NOTE: I claim the john kyl escape clause here.
#2 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:06 PM ESTIt's all a god damned liberal conspiracy to put down my dream of a HMMV in every driveway and the fine american ideal of the 5 gallon to the mile automobile I tell ya.
Seriously though. I have nothing against SUVs or tractor trailers, pickups, and other utility/work vehicles. The misconception is that they will always need oil products to meet the power requirements. This is a fallacy. There is no reason they can't run off of wireless transmission of electricity from under the road surface or off fuel cells to minimize the weight of batteries. All using a renewable energy as the primary source. Imagine a Hummer that gets 100 mpg cruising from the byproducts of your lawn clippings.
Well I don't think anyone needs a private vehicle like an HMMV (or a Hummer H1) though
Well I don't think anyone needs a private vehicle like an HMMV (or a Hummer H1) though
Really? You don't think the military has need of this type of vehicle? You can't think any situation of an individual where they could possibly require the same type of functions from a vehicle? Keep in mind that many private vehicles are used for private jobs. A farmer uses a private vehicle for farm work and to bop around town. I know individuals in the tree service business whose private vehicle is their work vehicle. So how do we distinguish this line between private vehicle and business vehicle?
This is a real issue. I am not trying to be difficult. And I am not even getting into personal choice versus environmental responsibility.
So the farmer isn't private? The carpenter isn't private? Or should they have 2 vehicles. One dedicated to running the kids to various activities, grocery shopping etc and one for work related activities. And a prohibition on using one in any way for the other functions? How do we implement this condition?
Don't get me wrong. Personally, I think it is ridiculous for a white collar worker that doesn't know the working end of a hammer, to commute to the office in a hummer every day. But how do we impose this restriction on the population as a whole? And do we have the right?
in those cases it would be a work vehicle, not a private vehicle.
In many of those cases it is both. If I only use a given vehicle to commute to work, is it a private vehicle or a work vehicle? How do you make that distinction? What if I had to use that same vehicle today to run to a supplier and pick up some goods, does that vehicle now become a work vehicle?
We are saying basically the same thing. I am only pointing out that for most people the distinction is not as cut and dry. That that flexibility needs to be kept in mind when setting policy.
And my point wasn't the work vehicle part of the equation, but the people buying these things for private recreational use only, hence the term 'private'.
And I agree that a change in mindset would be extremely useful. I just have a hard time in deciding how we set a limit on this involuntarily? How do we decide that this individuals use is acceptable and that persons is not? How do we decide that towing the boat to the water is or is not okay for each individual case? How do I decide what is appropriate for my neighbor's needs and you for your neighbor? Even if it is once a year where everyone agrees the use is "justified", is that enough or does it have to be more frequent?
It is a change of attitude that is needed and not a change in mandated behavior. One approach is to take away the overt subsidies of fossil fuels and the covert subsidies of the externalities. I have faith in people that when faced with the true cost of the options, they will pick the one that best suits their, societies, and the environment's needs and interests.
IOW, if gasoline reflected the health, environmental, tax breaks, below market leases, direct subsidies, and military costs how many of these people would be driving their Hummers at $20/gal? A fill up of $500?
Articles like this one need to get out into the mainstream media. People need to see the potential good that will come from cleaner sustainable energy. Germany has had great success in this area and the potential in Germany for solar and wind doesn't even come close to the US's potential.
Great Article wish I could vote it up a hundred times!
#3 - Mon Feb 13, 2012 12:09 PM ESTunfortunately fox news and its ilk will just treat it as left wing liberal commie fascist totalitarian pinko nonsense. (hmmm couldn't think of any more adjectives, but I am sure there are a few).
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Log In | Register
