"Green" Energy is a Joke at $26.00/gallon OCD_OCD: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/02/us-usa-navy-greenfleet-idUSBRE86106X20120702 (Reuters) - A U.S. Navy oiler slipped away from a fuel depot on the Puget Sound in Washington state one recent day, headed toward the central Pacific and into the storm over the Pentagon's controversial green fuels initiative. In its tanks, the USNS Henry J. Kaiser carried nearly 900,000 gallons of biofuel blended with petroleum to power the cruisers, destroyers and fighter jets of what the Navy has taken to calling the "Great Green Fleet," the first carrier strike group to be powered largely by alternative fuels. Conventionally powered ships and aircraft in the strike group will burn the blend in an operational setting for the first time this month during the 22-nation Rim of the Pacific exercise, the largest annual international maritime warfare maneuvers. The six-week exercise began on Friday. The Pentagon hopes it can prove the Navy looks as impressive burning fuel squeezed from seeds, algae and chicken fat as it does using petroleum. But the demonstration, years in the making, may be a Pyrrhic victory. Some Republican lawmakers have seized on the fuel's $26-a-gallon price, compared to $3.60 for conventional fuel. They paint the program as a waste of precious funds at a time when the U.S. government's budget remains severely strained, the Pentagon is facing cuts and energy companies are finding big quantities of oil and gas in the United States. Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, the program's biggest public booster, calls it vital for the military's energy security. But to President Barack Obama's critics, it is an opportunity to accuse the U.S. leader of pushing green energy policies even if they don't make economic sense. The bankruptcy of government-funded solar panel maker Solyndra last year was a previous example of that, they say. Senator John McCain, the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, expressed outrage over the costs of the fuel at a hearing earlier this year.  davidk14: . $26 dollars a gallon? Our taxes are going to $26 dollars a gallon instead of $3.60???? WTF are they thinking??? That the price will go down the more the military uses???? . davidk14: . Hey, let them create a nuclear powered car. We have warships running on nuclear energy, even space vehicles with this source of power. We have nuclear power plants creating energy to power our homes and our computers so we can communicate here on Wireclub. LET THE PEOPLE HAVE NUCLEAR! .  ohnonotthatguy: Wow expansive fuel for a nation that's bankrupt Let the navy and air force go back to the its original steps. ""Row,row,row your boat,gentle down the stream"" OCD_OCD: After what happened in Japan, I'm skeered of nuclear energy because apparently there are not enough safeguards Sarcastic Dots: This coming from a party than greenlit 5 billion dollars worth of camouflage that doesn't work. http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/06/24/062412-news-camouflage-fiasco-1-5/ US Military likes to waste money. News at 11. So yeah, I'd LOVE Republicans to pin this on one man (Obama) when the entire system is at fault. (Edited by Sarcastic Dots) davidk14: . President Truman had a plaque on his desk which read: The Buck Stops Here! President Obama has a plaque on his desk too but it reads: It's not my fault. Blame Bush. Truman took responsibility for his actions as President of the United States. Obama deflects responsibility. Has always done so, and will continue to do so. . Sarcastic Dots: To be fair, I said the system was at fault, and Republicans using this as a political tool doesn't mean they are going to change the system-- it just means they want to play political games without policies. Ignoring the fact that Obama is pro-green, do you honestly believe that, if Mitt Romney gained the presidency, he'd have the balls to take on the conservatives within his party and treat the military with the same vigour as, say, welfare? More importantly, is that what Americans want? (Edited by Sarcastic Dots) OCD_OCD: I want someone with some common sense who will actually toss out the lobbyists. I want someone who will go through the budget and get rid of the graft, triplicate spending and stop making up new departments to fund. OCD_OCD: Most people here do look favorably on "green" policies. HOWEVER, there is such a thing as not being simpleminded when it comes to practicing green policies. Green only works if it is affordable. At this juncture, many "green" policies cost outweigh their worth. Just because you can produce it doesn't mean it's economically feasible or even reasonable. We replaced the regular incandescent lightbulbs with "green" bulbs which contain mercury and when broken, take a hazmat team to clean up. How about having that chit on your carpets when you have a baby? We just took three giant steps backwards on that one. Sarcastic Dots: Well, there is something odd about a department that makes weapons for a living trying to save the world with bio-fuel. I don't really think that, if a country went to war, they'd care about what fuel they were using, as long as they had enough of it. OCD_OCD: The state of our present economics should mean they should exercise a little fiscal common sense, but it doesnt look like that is going to happen. We will keep blowing through borrowed money no matter what the cost. | Politics Chat Room 83 People Chatting Similar Conversations |
I don't want to glow in the dark, David.