So pitch your theory!

[DrakeMaiden]

So, I'm sitting in the restaurant with my husband at lunch, and he got up to go to the rest room. I happened to overhear the guy sitting across the aisle from us say, "Nah, I don't see how the economy can turn around . . . I don't care what Wall St. thinks . . . with all the job losses, things are going to keep getting worse."

This was an average Joe type guy.

My husband came back so I only heard the rest in little bits and pieces, but he and his friend were talking about storing water for 6 months at a time, and buying canned goods on sale, etc.

LOL I thought for a minute that I was listening to someone from the SS forum.

Interesting experience.

 

[sylvie]

Last year we bought a completely rebuilt Farmall Cub for small jobs. It seemed like a good SS investment. We used to see Farmall parts, implements everywhere and figured that we could find everything we'd need.
We can't find a disk, plow, cultivator, or any accessory, for that matter.
Everyone has been hauling those good old iron implements for scrap. Those items will never be made again. What a shameful waste!

We will be more careful when investing for self sufficiency.

I would like to see the manufacturing base revived in this country. That's about the extent of my "theory".

 

[Big Daddy]

I am one class away from a degree in solar engineering (car accident stopped me from graduating and the college no longer offers the program).

During the Reagan years, solar was NOT ready for prime time. All kinds of wacky solar set ups were being installed just for the sake of the tax credits.

Solar has come a long way. Heck, I just bought some really nice solar powered LED yard lights. But back then...unless you were building passive solar in to new construction, it was a serious waste of time and money.

It wasn't how effective they were then compared to now. It was the symbolism when Carter had them installed. He was trying to set an example. Trying to get the country going in the right direction.

Reagan too was setting an example.

 

[Wifezilla]

Using inefficient, over-priced, not ready for commercial use technology was a symbol for what again?

Government inefficiency? Politicians disconnect with reality? Doing something because it feels good and ignoring that it doesn't make economic sense? Ok, I'll buy that.

 

[Tallman]

Using inefficient, over-priced, not ready for commercial use technology was a symbol for what again?

Government inefficiency? Politicians disconnect with reality? Doing something because it feels good and ignoring that it doesn't make economic sense? Ok, I'll buy that.

I'm glad you explained that!

 

[Big Daddy]

Using inefficient, over-priced, not ready for commercial use technology was a symbol for what again?

Government inefficiency? Politicians disconnect with reality? Doing something because it feels good and ignoring that it doesn't make economic sense? Ok, I'll buy that.

It's ok if I need to explain it then it would be a lost issue. Reagan didn't get it either.

 

[me&thegals]

Using inefficient, over-priced, not ready for commercial use technology was a symbol for what again?

Government inefficiency? Politicians disconnect with reality? Doing something because it feels good and ignoring that it doesn't make economic sense? Ok, I'll buy that.

Any new technology is going to have that awkward stage, that time of working the bugs out and starting to build demand until there's enough demand to take it to the masses, where even more bugs get worked out and it becomes more affordable. It's just too bad that this whole process was delayed until now. We could be like other countries and WAY further in our clean and renewable energy.

 

[VT-Chicklit]

I tried to price out going solar or doing wind (better in my area). My best guess is that it will cost me around 40K to do either. I did not bother to further investigate the cost because it would be too prohibitive. I wouldn't make the cost back until I was in my late 70's and that is if nothing broke or wore out. Personal solar or wind power to go off the grid is pie-in-the-sky for the average citizen. It is not affordable enough. Small stuff that is run by solar or wind is more doable, but it is still expensive for the savings that you would get and the limited life span of the product during which you would have to break even on the cost.

 

[me&thegals]

It would be great to see both get WAY more common in America. Maybe they will continue to be out of reach for most of us, but what if our power plants depended on them more instead of coal?

 

[VT-Chicklit]

I think it would be great if the power companies started to use more types of alternate energy. It is unfortunate that there are many groups that espouse conservation and a green lifestyle but are making it more difficult for the energy businesses to use these greener renewable alternatives.

In Vermont, the wind is very reliable and some companies have tried to put up wind turbines. They have been thwarted at every turn by people who don't want them on the ridge lines, which is where the best wind is. They also don't want them in the Champlain Valley, which is where some of the best wind is. I bet these people will not be first in line to give up their electricity or go cold in the winter inorder to not pollute and keep everything pristine.

These are the same people that have problems with our old and decrepit nuc plant. I have problems with the plant as well, and feel that we need to get an alternative source of electricity inorder to be able to decomission it. I would love for there to be wind mills that produced the energy Vermont needs. They could plant one in my back yard!

This is where all of this alternate energy talk becomes pie-in-the-sky. There are groups that have issues with any way to produce large amounts of energy. These groups litigate attempts to diversify our energy sources. If Vermont, a state with a very small population, cant poduce enough energy from alternate sources to supply its citizens, I cant see it happening elsewhere in the US. They have issues with hydro (fish spawning), wood chip burning (pollution), wind mills (eyesore), new nuc (too dangerous) and so on. I feel like I am being held hostage by these people.

The energy that is used in my county is produced in Canada! The contracts with that Canadian firm are comming due and I am sure the new contracts that the co-op will negotiate will cost us more. I currently pay 14.7 cents a k/hr. It is crazy to purchase from another country what you can produce yourself. Can you say OIL! We in the islands have alot of wind and wind mills would make sense! There is a hue and cry when wind mills are mentioned in the Champlain Valley. I think that it is a bit hypocritical to believe that it is alright for Canadian fish to have difficulty spawning, Canadian air be polluted, Canadian views be "spoiled" and so on to produce the energy that we are not being allowed to produce here for those reasons!

The reality is we need electricity to be a productive first world country and producing electricity, like producing anything else, changes the enviornment. Any technology we have to prouce electricity is not perfect and we cannot wait for it to be perfect. It is unfortunate that there are those who are making this transition almost impossible and more costley with each law suit. I don't want a wind mill on every ridge line but it would be fine with me if some of the ridge lines had them and some were placed in our valley to produce the electricity we need. This would be safer that an aging nuc plant, burning wood chips, coal etc and more economical that the Canadian electricity and it is renewable.