« Going Green Is Saving Green | Home | Brazil’s Leadership In Ethanol Was Born In The 1930s »
‘Forbes’ Gets It Wrong On Nuclear Energy
By Mr Ethanol | December 12, 2007
Hawaii Reporter:
In the November 26, 2007 issue of Forbes, authors Jerry Taylor and Peter Van Doren turned the U.S. nuclear energy situation into a superficial mishmash (http://tinyurl.com/223nl2).
Their thesis is that what they perceive as heavy subsidies of the U.S. nuclear energy system should be an impetus for conservatives to join leftists such as Bonnie Raitt and Graham Nash in their fight against nuclear energy. Their “beef” is with the loan guarantees being proposed in new legislation for the nuclear industry.
I would agree that there should be no subsidies to any sources of energy, but to single out those to the nuclear industry is naked hypocrisy. A wiser recommendation to conservatives would be to join in the elimination of all such subsidies.
On a per Btu basis the subsidies to ethanol, wind, and solar are much larger subsidies which have been going on for more than 3 decades. The 52 cents subsidy for a gallon of ethanol (containing 76,000 Btu/gallon) is huge, not to mention the resulting reduced mileage and significant CO2 emissions in its production and use.
Topics: Energy, Industry, Market, News |
Related Posts
- House Boosts Clean Energy, Veteran Funds
- Nuclear, Ethanol On Bush-Howard Agenda
- Alternate Energy Holdings’ Proposed Nuclear Plant Would Avoid 11.3 Million Tons Of Carbon
- Energy Subsidy Dreams
- Ethanol: Getting There Is None Of The Fun
- Ethanol Trade Group Spent $162000 Lobbying In 1Q
- Ethanol Industry Group Hires Lobbyist
- GM Believes Ethanol As Renewable Fuel Is Best Near-Term Alternative To Oil
- Ethanol Makers
- U.S. Eyes Brazil’s Ethanol Blueprint
New Way Of Making Easy Money Online