DanielM:

One the votes aren't there in the senate (at least I don't think they will be). Two if it does pass natural gas stands to benefit from it as it burns a lot cleaner and produces no CO2 which makes it a better alternative opposed to oil or coal. I don't think the cap and trade is really all to bad either. It will put a giant shift into the way the country gets its power and should improve other sources of energy over the long run (ya it may hurt a little now but it should be a lot less in the long run).

It might pass, but it is facing an uphill battle in the Senate.  If it does pass, it probably will be weaker than the House version.

Natural gas does stand to benefit (as does wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, and biogas/biofuels), but it does produce CO2, but it does produce only 30-45% of the CO2 that petroluem and coal do, so it is a viable alternative.  It is also abdundant and can be made to be very efficient. 

Bloominonion wrote: " It is a new world we live in, and the thing you must keep in mind is, it is CHINA's world, not USAs.
I heard something bizarre on FastMoney tonight.  Peabody Coal is shipping coal from USA to China to meet China's demand for it.  So they want our coal, whether we want it or not.
Imagine what that means for natural gas and oil."

China is a very perplexing country.  Because they obviously have a incredible appetite for energy and for raw materials, but at the same time there is acknowledgement that things cannot continue (the unobstructed polluting and environmental mismanagement) the way they have been in the past.   For example, last week the Chinese Government nixed plans for a Chinese company to buy Hummer from GM.   They cited environmental reasons, stating that since the Hummer wouldn't meet Chinese automobile emissions standards they couldn't even sell the very cars they would be producing in their own country.  That makes you think......

VTECscreamer:

DanielM:

One the votes aren't there in the senate (at least I don't think they will be). Two if it does pass natural gas stands to benefit from it as it burns a lot cleaner and produces no CO2 which makes it a better alternative opposed to oil or coal. I don't think the cap and trade is really all to bad either. It will put a giant shift into the way the country gets its power and should improve other sources of energy over the long run (ya it may hurt a little now but it should be a lot less in the long run).

It might pass, but it is facing an uphill battle in the Senate.  If it does pass, it probably will be weaker than the House version.

Natural gas does stand to benefit (as does wind, solar, hydro, nuclear, and biogas/biofuels), but it does produce CO2, but it does produce only 30-45% of the CO2 that petroluem and coal do, so it is a viable alternative.  It is also abdundant and can be made to be very efficient. 

 

Bloominonion wrote: " It is a new world we live in, and the thing you must keep in mind is, it is CHINA's world, not USAs.
I heard something bizarre on FastMoney tonight.  Peabody Coal is shipping coal from USA to China to meet China's demand for it.  So they want our coal, whether we want it or not.
Imagine what that means for natural gas and oil."

China is a very perplexing country.  Because they obviously have a incredible appetite for energy and for raw materials, but at the same time there is acknowledgement that things cannot continue (the unobstructed polluting and environmental mismanagement) the way they have been in the past.   For example, last week the Chinese Government nixed plans for a Chinese company to buy Hummer from GM.   They cited environmental reasons, stating that since the Hummer wouldn't meet Chinese automobile emissions standards they couldn't even sell the very cars they would be producing in their own country.  That makes you think......

aquaswim47:

Is natural gas dead if this bill passes or will it result in a diversity of options available? I am curious.

What do you think of natural gas?  Would you be a buyer of UNG, or an alternative energy ETF/company?

I think it could result in a diversity of sources of electrical energy available and distributed throughout the US.   This in turn could result in a reduced dependence on oil, both foreign and domestic.

VTECscreamer:

aquaswim47:

Is natural gas dead if this bill passes or will it result in a diversity of options available? I am curious.

What do you think of natural gas?  Would you be a buyer of UNG, or an alternative energy ETF/company?

I think it could result in a diversity of sources of electrical energy available and distributed throughout the US.   This in turn could result in a reduced dependence on oil, both foreign and domestic.

Bloominonion:

That's a good thought VTEC; cap and trade indirectly boosts energy independence by giving alternative energy a boost.  And energy independence is something Americans should stand for this 4th of July!

Thanks.  That is why I support a different system than is being proposed now.  I like a hybrid system like a cap and dividend.  I think it is in Americas best interest to get our source of electrical energy from completely renewable and self sustaining sources, not finate sources like oil and to a lesser extent natural gas, and Uranium/Plutonium.  For me cap and trade is not just about carbon emissions it is about energy independence as well. 

VTECscreamer:

Bloominonion:

That's a good thought VTEC; cap and trade indirectly boosts energy independence by giving alternative energy a boost.  And energy independence is something Americans should stand for this 4th of July!

Thanks.  That is why I support a different system than is being proposed now.  I like a hybrid system like a cap and dividend.  I think it is in Americas best interest to get our source of electrical energy from completely renewable and self sustaining sources, not finate sources like oil and to a lesser extent natural gas, and Uranium/Plutonium.  For me cap and trade is not just about carbon emissions it is about energy independence as well. 

aquaswim47:

VTECscreamer:

Bloominonion:

That's a good thought VTEC; cap and trade indirectly boosts energy independence by giving alternative energy a boost.  And energy independence is something Americans should stand for this 4th of July!

Thanks.  That is why I support a different system than is being proposed now.  I like a hybrid system like a cap and dividend.  I think it is in Americas best interest to get our source of electrical energy from completely renewable and self sustaining sources, not finate sources like oil and to a lesser extent natural gas, and Uranium/Plutonium.  For me cap and trade is not just about carbon emissions it is about energy independence as well. 

I agree. When you work with children, positive reinforcement tends to be more successful, but punishment at times is necessary. I think if there are incentives to use natural gas and to conserve and only penalize people who are not in the best interest of public policy (i.e. improper disposal). Nuclear power is another interest option that should be explored.

I think we should help protect the environment, but maybe this cap and trade bill is not the best way to go about creating such change. I do think we should be better educated consumers and that alternative energies that can survive w/o subsidies should be given the subsidies to ensure their success. As long as the Congress reads the bill and attempts to come up with a bi-partisan solution that mainly focuses on the use of natural gas and nuclear power, but that also wants to triple (not double) solar and wind, I'm all for such a bill. If we do a little over triple our wind and solar, we will have about 4% solar and wind energy, but if we do slightly less than double (i.e. bring it from 1.25% to 2%), it won't solve the problem. I'd like to double our use of nuclear (i.e. from 20% to 40%) and have natural gas be another 20% of our energy solution. So if nuclear, solar, wind, and natural gas makes up 64% of our energy consumption, maybe than conservation is an excellent idea. Maybe we could come up with flex-fuel vehicles like they have in Brazil that can run on sugar (not corn) ethanol. I honestly don't mind if my candy bar goes from $1 to $2.50. We all need a little less sugar anyways and probably would live longer lives with less diabetes and less obesity. Talk about a win/win solution. Even if that sugar ethanol made up 1/6 of our energy consumption, only 20% of our energy would be devoted towards fossil fuels, thus we could derive all our energy from Canada, pay about $4.50 per gallon to make it profitable, and not have to depend on the Middle East. That's my solution. So lets reward people for good behavior rather than make it solely about energy use. The bill assumes that all energy use is bad and that the cost should be passed on from third-party consumers to the "polluters" but that makes little sense.

It is an interesting take to say that polluters should pay and higher utilities costs will encourage people to conserve. That will hopefully pay for good uses of alternative energy that will once and for all get us off of Middle East oil. Just like as a consumer I like competition, I like having competition as a country that gives us options, has us have the innovative spirit that we had in the 1960s to be science and math wizards, and to remain the strongest superpower in the world. The best thing is the possibility to develop partnerships (i.e. with China and Brazil) in building these solar panels and wind turbines. Obama could use that as leverage to help North Korea behave.

DanielM:

One the votes aren't there in the senate (at least I don't think they will be). Two if it does pass natural gas stands to benefit from it as it burns a lot cleaner and produces no CO2 which makes it a better alternative opposed to oil or coal. I don't think the cap and trade is really all to bad either. It will put a giant shift into the way the country gets its power and should improve other sources of energy over the long run (ya it may hurt a little now but it should be a lot less in the long run).