LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

Clean fuel will lead to energy independence

William Belknap, Boulder City

Monday, Aug. 4, 2008 | 2:03 a.m.

In his weekly e-mail newsletter, Sen. John Ensign closes the paragraph on energy with: “All energy solutions must be on the table and all sides must come together, as Americans, to ensure our country’s energy independence.“

I submit that the true target for our energy policy should be to eliminate reliance on fossil carbon sources, whether they be oil, natural gas or coal. Stopping the burning of carbon compounds for energy will do what we can to prevent acceleration of climate change, the least we should now do for our grandchildren. Incidentally, doing so will give us back our energy independence and minimize harmful effects to land and sea.

Arguing over whether to burn their oil or ours is like trying to settle whether better navigation or a double hull should have been used on the Exxon Valdez before doing anything about the spilling oil.

Discussion: 7 comments so far…

By uddeboda

8/4/08 at 2:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Just because one Sen comes out and says this, what about the other hundreds who are still with their heads in the sand, like nothing matters, as long as its fossil fuels, thats the only way forward for these dimwits. One would think they didnt have any offsprings. "What was my granddaddie thinking of" will be the question they will be asking in 30-40 yrs times, in 30-40 yrs time, when the USA will still be using fossil fuels, the mid-west will be desert, sealevels will have risen 2-3 meters, Miami will be an offshore island, Manhatten flooded, 100s of millions on the move seeking water and food, civil wars will be rife across the world.
By captkell

8/4/08 at 6:50 a.m.

Suggest removal

Exxon decision not justice for fishermen

My name is Kellie Kvasnikoff. I was a commercial fisherman forced into a career change by the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. In 2006 I published a book on the oil spill entitled "Exxon Valdez 18 Years and Counting." In that book I said that justice for the Exxon Valdez-impacted fishermen should be spelled "Just Us." The law did not help us in our time of need. It hindered us. The law went any way Exxon wished to pull it.
This latest Supreme Court decision on punitive damages (Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker) is more of the same. It is a travesty. It is filled with errors. Bad facts, bad law.
Please help to correct this gross error of the Supreme Court by signing a petition to open an investigation immediately and without delay into the wrongdoings of the Exxon Shipping Co. and specifically the erroneous act of the Supreme Court in Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker. You may sign this petition at (cut, copy and paste into your browser) http://www.rallycongress.com/exxon.
Law made from the bench should be a warning to every American.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Kellie Kvasnikoff
By jfnance32

8/4/08 at 8:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Obama energy plan does not include a plan to get off fossil fuels because there are no practical cost effective technologies to do that now.

I guess you should vote for Ralph Nader.

The cheapest electric car will be over $45,000 when it comes online in several years. It will be a very small 4 door car with very little thrills.

It will still use fossil fuels because after 40 miles it needs extra energy to recharge the battery. After 360 miles, you will need to pull over and wait 10 hours to re-charge the battery.

Even if we all got electric cars, the current power grid barelys cover current energy needs. To add re-charging 10 hours 200 million electric will require a massive expansion of the power grid. It is doubtful that can occur without including coal and Nuclear energy. Solar and wind are not 24/7 generators of power. There is not a cost effective means of storing energy.

I doubt if the airline fleet or big ships will ever get off fossil fuels.

I am OK with putting a lot money in R&D in the electric car. It is far from being even inch close to what we need.

Also, I am OK with putting a lot R & D money into energy storage technologies. We need that if we want to rely on solar and wind power.
By AgMallard

8/4/08 at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Q: What the heck is "clean coal?"
A: Republican catch phrase for burning the same old coal we've been digging out of the ground for centuries.
By neiman1

8/4/08 at 1:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

American resources for American energy and American jobs. You cannot clean the planet by employing millions of people so they consume less. We need oil, nuclear, coal, oil shale, solar, wind, geothermal, get it all. But quit tying our hands and sending 700 billion a year overseas so we can borrow from China to pay for it.
Contact harry reid and tell him to call the Senate back and open our resources NOW

Phone: 202-224-3542 Fax: 202-224-7327 Toll Free for Nevadans: 1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343)
email link
http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm...
By Future2012

8/4/08 at 2:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Everybody wants the the future now - but we will not get to the future until the future. Point is we have to Transition. Transition must include domestic oil for many years.
By uddeboda

8/4/08 at 11:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

AgMallard,
Clean coal is when you get hundreds of illegal immigrants from Mexico to wash the coal before it is used as fuel, it is then the reps call it clean coal, only joking ??