Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Jaydebull

Reply From Senator Coleman

15 posts in this topic

Well, I finally received a reply From Senator Coleman.. It is as follows. I do agree with alot of whats in his bill..

Dear Mr. (Edited):

Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning the price of gas at the pump. I agree it is critical for domestic development of energy, which is why I recently introduced a bill, the Energy Resource Development Act of 2008 (S. 3126) - to expand our domestic energy production.

I believe it is critical to act boldly to address our energy security crisis in the near term, which is why my bill, S. 3126, calls for diversifying America's energy portfolio to take advantage of the United States' many domestic fuel resources by opening up portions of the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) for oil and gas development, fully funding the nation's renewable energy and energy technology programs, developing coal-to-liquid technology, and boosting our nuclear energy production.

To begin with, S. 3126 would open up most of the OCS to oil and gas development in a way that protects the environments and economies of states in new development areas. There are an estimated 18 billion barrels of crude oil and 77 trillion cubic feet of natural gas that could be produced in areas currently under moratoria. If developed, this could reduce America's trade deficit by $145 billion by offsetting oil imports. The federal proceeds of this new development would fund a new Energy Independence Trust Fund that would go to fully fund all renewable energy, energy efficiency, research and development, and technology deployment programs from the last two omnibus energy bills, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Energy Independence Security Act of 2007. Additionally, the fund will provide resources for a new ethanol pipeline loan guarantee program and fund new nuclear energy production incentives.

My bill would also invest in coal-to-liquid fuel and nuclear energy. S. 3126 will utilize our 250 year supply of coal by creating a new standard for the production of fuel from clean coal, often called coal-to-liquid technology, while ensuring that the latest, cleanest technology is used during its production. Meanwhile, one of the cleanest energy technologies available is nuclear, and this legislation would accelerate the resurgence of nuclear energy production in the United States by improving the loan guarantee program for nuclear production, creating a nuclear investment tax credit, and increase training for the nuclear workforce.

I sincerely believe that we can solve the energy crisis we are facing if America takes bold action to utilize the domestic resources at its disposal. Please know that I will continue my commitment to free America from foreign oil.

Thank you once again for contacting me. If I may be of further assistance to you in the future, please do not hesitate to contact me again.

Sincerely,

Norm Coleman

United States Senate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Clean coal is a joke....heavy pollution still....and ethanol is a bandaide on a severed arm...it takes WAY too much energy to produce the ethanol and tons of corn on top of that....we need maximize our use and utilize better technology like solar, wind and battery power...there is a battery out there that can give a vehicle over 300 miles to the charge and you lose virtually no horse power in that engine( we need the infrastructure to make it happen)...check out the documentary "Who killed the electric Car" this happened ten years ago so who knows how much better the tech. is or can be....i do give credit to coleman for striking up the initiative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great that there are electric cars. So when we all switch over to driving electric cars, where do we go to get the electricity? Heck, electric rates are already beginning to climb rapidly. Mine just jumped 40% in the last six months and a lot of electricity comes from renewable resources already and yet it is one of the highest costing energy sources we have, both in terms of dollars and environmental impact.

Because of the methods used to produce a lot of the electricity we consume, if we switched all of our homes to electric heat, the production of that electricity would potentially put out about three times the amount of soot and smoke into our atmosphere than fuel oil, natural gas, and propane combined for the same purpose. Plus, at current prices it would cost us about 10% more dollars.

Yep. Electricity is the solutions alright. We fall for the advertising campaign that the electric car gets XXX miles per gallon but forget that plugging in those cars to recharge those batteries isn't free. Sure, we would use fewer gallons per mile driven but would we really change anything? Could actually make things worse.

We use energy and we must use energy. There is no known perfect and practical energy solution at this time. We have not invented the perpetual motion machine yet. These are facts. The only way we won't continue to consume energy is by dying and we'll even use some energy in death for a while until our body is done decomposing.

There are many options being explored and just because one option hasn't proven itself yet is no cause to abandon the search. Heck, look how far we've come with gasoline engines in the last 100 years. Yes. It took 100 years to get where we are and we're still learning what we can do. Good thing they didn't quit trying when they first started, eh?

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Bob. Electric cars will only switch where the polution is created, not solve the problem. Can you say rolling blackout?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear is not clean. The emissions are but what do we do with spent fuel rods that are going to accumulate at a much higher rate if those that are for it get there way.

I believe every 18 months two fuel rods replaced and put into storage. This stuff does not go away. Now add 45 more nuclear sights, the storage for this stuff will be used up in no time then what do we do. Or do we keep digging wholes in mountains to keep this crud and push the problem on future generations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should turn Texas in to a nuclear dumping ground. Nothing good has ever come out of that "State" and we could finally get some some use out of that wasted space. grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what we do there will be negative effects. I build my home and as a result the water that runs off my roof no longer soaks in to the ground where my house stands and so it has to go somewhere. The problem is that my house is about twice the size of the house I grew up in and I grew with 6 siblings. My current family is only 4 total members. This means that for each member of my current family we use about 4x the living space which translates into more fuel for heat and cooling if I install an A/C unit.

When I was a kid we didn't have to have a SUV or Van to go to town because all nine of us fit into that Ford Galaxie500. Not even legal today so now we sacrifice and burn more fuel per rider as a result.

Just a couple examples of how things have changed that have an effect. Not saying it's better, worse, or somewhere in between, just different and it makes a difference.

Bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nuclear is not clean. The emissions are but what do we do with spent fuel rods that are going to accumulate at a much higher rate if those that are for it get there way.

Well, someone better pick which definition of "clean" they want, because they can't have everything.

France doesn't seem to have a problem with nuclear power. In fact, they have 59 nuclear plants operating right now which leads to some of the world's lowest electric rates. Their air quality just also happens to be some of the best on earth as well.

MN can't build nuclear reactors because the Democrats persistently keep blocking the movement to open up the door to even exploring the possibility, let alone build one. rolleyes.gif

A nuclear plant doesn't just spring up overnight and we're already on a crash course with not having enough electricity (with reserve) in this country in less than a dozen years, so something better get changed in a hurry because throwing up more wind turbines ain't gonna cut the mustard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was a kid we didn't have to have a SUV or Van to go to town because all nine of us fit into that Ford Galaxie500. Not even legal today so now we sacrifice and burn more fuel per rider as a result.

Bob

A brand new Chevy Suburban will get better gas mileage than that Galaxie 500 ever did...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: croixflats
Nuclear is not clean. The emissions are but what do we do with spent fuel rods that are going to accumulate at a much higher rate if those that are for it get there way.

Well, someone better pick which definition of "clean" they want, because they can't have everything.

France doesn't seem to have a problem with nuclear power. In fact, they have 59 nuclear plants operating right now which leads to some of the world's lowest electric rates. Their air quality just happens to also be some of the best on earth as well.

MN can't build nuclear reactors because the Democrats persistently keep blocking the movement to open up the door to even exploring the possibility, let alone build one. rolleyes.gif

A nuclear plant doesn't just spring up overnight and we're already on a crash course with not having enough electricity (with reserve) in this country in less than a dozen years, so something better get changed in a hurry because throwing up more wind turbines ain't gonna cut the mustard.

You know, Dan, you make sense in a twisted, sort of creepy, way. I think if I was into LSD I'd be able to REALLY get behind your way of thinking.

Wind and solar are not a solution. They are part of it, however. And I believe nuclear is a BIG part of it, too. Beat the nuclear waste issues and we've got it pretty well down. Our technology is so awesome that we can do it. IF, and I say IF, we decide to.

It makes me so uneasy to even agree in part to LMITOUT that I'm looking over my shoulder for Big Brother's listening devices. Uh, Dan, how's the LSD over there in the brown suit camp?

No matter what, a guy who has the best avatar ever conceived on HSO/FM can't be all bad, right? gringrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With as smart as some of these youngsters are today, it won't be all that long before they either find a use for the spent fuel rods, or find a way to safely dispose of them.

Check this out: http://www.physorg.com/news136738014.html

Snip:

In a revolutionary leap that could transform solar power from a marginal, boutique alternative into a mainstream energy source, MIT researchers have overcome a major barrier to large-scale solar power: storing energy for use when the sun doesn't shine.

Until now, solar power has been a daytime-only energy source, because storing extra solar energy for later use is prohibitively expensive and grossly inefficient. With today's announcement, MIT researchers have hit upon a simple, inexpensive, highly efficient process for storing solar energy.

Requiring nothing but abundant, non-toxic natural materials, this discovery could unlock the most potent, carbon-free energy source of all: the sun."This is the nirvana of what we've been talking about for years," said MIT's Daniel Nocera, the Henry Dreyfus Professor of Energy at MIT and senior author of a paper describing the work in the July 31 issue of Science. "Solar power has always been a limited, far-off solution. Now we can seriously think about solar power as unlimited and soon."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting article. Hope they can something of that nature out in the real world. Doing something in a controlled lab environment and moving it to the real world is two different things. But on the other hand this is how all new technologies start out.

Progress marches on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love that show. The good old days when you didn't have to be so PC. And to think he had it right back then!! grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0