"Like I said before, if there was a promising solution investor would want some of the action."
For the record, if there's a promising solution then it's really just growth investing rather speculative investing. And that said there is hundreds of billions of speculative investor $$ in clean - not cleaner - energy. Google happens to be one of those investors, but there are many many others who 'want some of the action'. On Dec 8, 2011, at 9:12 AM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 6:26 PM, William Bowen <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> My solution is you shouldn't drink from the well that I sit on. >> >> How about you stop "sitting" in our drinking water? Or should you (and >> by extension corporations) just be allowed to "sit" wherever you want? > > Again, if you're going to drink from my toilet don't complain about the smell. > If you think someone is shitting in your water supply then that's a > separate issue and you need to resolve it. > >>> So is it all or nothing? We stop using fossil fuel to save the planet >>> or do we make it more effective? > >> A small fraction of the billions we pour into defense could easily >> fund research into better/more efficient fuels, and yes government >> does have a vested interest in the research. > > So strip money from defense, which is a know issue, for funding an > unknown because Al Gore wants more money. > > We put our priorities where they need to be. Defense is number one or > at least the top three. Saving the planet from people breath is not so > high up the chart. That being said, we've been researching better/more > efficient fuels since we started using fuel. Throwing money at it > doesn't guarantee results. Like I said before, if there was a > promising solution investor would want some of the action. Unless > we're to believe Exxon figured out how to use air as fuel but want to > keep it secret so they can milk us for oil. > >>> Who's to say we're not doing the >>> earth a favor by ridding it of this possible cancer? So many ways to >>> look at it. >> >> Wow, Great Chain of Being much? > > I don't know what that is. But if forest fires are good because the > clean out the old and make room for the new who's to say removing coal > won't have a positive effect. My point was there are no simple > answers. Change can have impact and that also needs to be studied. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:344381 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
