Quote:
Originally Posted by jbw97361
I wouldn't have minded. Plants grew a lot faster then, maybe we could feed all the starving people of the world. data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d6b75/d6b75c3747d3b8a0f92408af1485908d433ae864" alt="Smilie"
|
We already could feed the starving people of the world, save that it's economically infeasable. How's that for fun? Hey Starvin' Marvin, want more than a cup of rice a day? Ooops, sorry had to burn that corn because of that black market affect. I'm reducing a serious problem to a ridiculous example, but still it makes me a little vexed, as
SuperBelt might say.
At least the chickas would all have tans until they had that little melanoma problem
**********************
Re
SuperBelt : exactly.
Re
ObieX : I think that 2 is exactly on. I think 1 is more complicated, sort of like the world starvation issue. Exxon and Sunoco and all the rest of them are buying up patents right and left to corner the market on alternative energies, and they put independent research into it as well. These companies and our government are aware of
peak oil as much as anyone else. I just saw data from Savanah River National Labs that acknowledges as much two weeks ago. They just want to control the technology and the transition to maximize $$$ and to corner the market. I think they're interested in doing the right thing...eventually, which makes it the wrong thing because the time lag could be so dangerous. Perhaps this was your point - I'm just saying they don't want to cut out alternative fuel sources, they just want to stifle them for a while and then focus on those that can be controlled.
edit but yes, the level of entanglement between business concerns and our political structures is a serious problem. Putting the wolf in charge of the hen house, and all that stuff.