View Single Post
Old
11-21-2012, 05:05 PM
  #28
RandV
It's a wolf v2.0
 
RandV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,889
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TasteofFlames View Post
The government hasn't forced anything on me (well there's the 10% ethanol requirement, but that's not a big deal to me), they are investing in all potential alternatives, because that's what they [B]must[B] do for the research to happen. Plus, the construction of wind/solar farms put a lot of people to work. Historically speaking, private industry does not spend much time on the cutting edge. That's typically done through publicly funded research. Truly cutting edge research/exploration is not an economically sound investment, as no one knows the end result. Publicly funded research finds the core aspects of the sciences, then private industry comes in and finds applications for a concept and ways to improve efficiency on a system/product to make it profitable. Right now, we are still at the "figuring it out" stage when it comes to alternative energy sources.
In my opinion, part of the problem is that in the current political climate getting things done has become narrowed down to two possibilities, private or public, which is then directly linked to corporate or government respectively. Private is seen as quick and efficient, while public is slow and wasteful. In many cases this is true but the problem is the definition is too narrow and cuts out a 3rd key player, the academic/science. This party performs research and makes new discoveries that have been vital to the advancement of the human race. They are not a wasteful government bureaucracy, and making them answer to a corporate board room (which is what private) about return on investments is not going to improve anything.

RandV is offline   Reply With Quote