DU this poll (alternative energy)

[JohnLocke]

Bottom of page: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion /
Keep this kicked, folks.
-------
BTW, how could 1000+ people believe that "private industry should invest in alternative energy when it makes economic sense"? When is that, in the middle of a gigantic oil crisis?

[NMDemDist2]

1. done

26.2%
It's time for government to invest in developing alternative fuels. I'm willing to pay for it with tax dollars. (836 responses)

32.1%
Let private industry do it; the marketplace will respond when it makes economic sense. (1025 responses)

30.6%
Instead of alternative fuels, the US should focus on using less energy, with fuel-efficient cars and public transit. (977 responses)

11.1%
None of the above. (354

[skooooo]

2. replied to invest tax money...

....leaving it to the corporations??? You've got to be kidding me.

[LittleApple81]

3. I did vote. But I think there are two of the choices that we must be able

to choose simultaneously (it is not an either/or choice, IMHO)
With gas prices inching over $2 a gallon, what's your view on alternative fuel sources?

1)It's time for government to invest in developing alternative fuels. 2)I'm willing to pay for it with tax dollars.
Let private industry do it; the marketplace will respond when it makes economic sense.
3)Instead of alternative fuels, the US should focus on using less energy, with fuel-efficient cars and public transit.
4)None of the above.

For me, I would choose 1 and 3 (not instead, but besides alternative fuels).

[markdd]

8. poll is rigged

No, I don't know if it's being run to prove a point. But since answers 1 & 3 are similar approaches, they will split votes and leave the private industry selection with a disproportionate share of the votes. While alternate fuels & government action are clearly the preferred choices ~65 - 33, it will appear that the private solution is slightly more "popular" than government action.

[Momgonepostal]

9. To add to this, I'd also favor...

..giving tax incentives to private companies to work on alternative energy development. I definitely wouldn't trust private sector to do this all on their own, but anything that would encourage R&D in this area is great.

[noahmijo]

4. Anything that says "Fuck You Saudia Arabia and your oil"

I fully support. Anything that makes us independent or any initiative that leads us to being independent of middle eastern oil I'm all for it.

[JohnLocke]

5. Yes!

[immoderate]

6. The government must lead the way

Alternative fuels (and I'm talking hydrogen here) bring up the chicken/egg problem. The infrastructure must be primed to supply the means for fueling, and private industry is less likely to take the risk without widespread support.

This may upset some anti-corporatists. It will be a windfall for the establishment. But the long run will lead to individual control of energy sources.

--IMM

[noahmijo]

7. Well I agree

The problem is when you let the government do everything for you quality and effiency drops because you're not caring about profits.

Let private corporations handle everything then you got scandals, bribes, anything it takes to maximize profits.

There needs to be a marriage between the two when it comes to this kind of research and development.

[immoderate]

11. Yes this will take planning.

And it means that the Bush class is disqualified. No vision, y'know.

Government and industry, science and policy must be integrated. It is another stage of revolution, and we can hardly afford the missteps of other stages in the industrial revolution. Gosh, I'm waxing Utopian!

--IMM

[opihimoimoi]

10. In the mean time, its should be considered wise to conserve our

energy usage by making things more efficent. We all hate to give up our recreation so we plan for approaches to avoid that aspect instead by focusing on efficiency. More milage for cars. Designing cities and communites to use less energy but the same or more output. We can do it. it just takes engineering and planning.

[immoderate]

12. Yep!

--IMM

[mitchtv]

13. bad poll

none of the above-? WTF? I want ALL of the above.

[kittykitty]

14. Me too, it was badly designed

[Deja Q]

15. The number of idiots is up to 1238

26.0%
It's time for government to invest in developing alternative fuels. I'm willing to pay for it with tax dollars. (921 responses)

34.9%
Let private industry do it; the marketplace will respond when it makes economic sense. (1238 responses)

28.9%
Instead of alternative fuels, the US should focus on using less energy, with fuel-efficient cars and public transit. (1024 responses)

10.2%
None of the above. (362 responses)




I voted #3. I loved #1, but the government would pass it on to big corporations who would then strangle us with it. Nothing is ever fair.

[Darranar]

16. How about both 1 and 3?

Both conservation and alternative energy are important. Alternative energy will, at least at first and probably for a very long time, if not forever, be insufficient for the amount of energy used right now. However, some energy has to be used somewhere, and the way we're using oil there won't be enough for even that sooner or later. So, concentrating on either solution is foolish; both should be well-funded.