[tomder55]

Where I come from the government has started to buy properties and water rights for "environmental flows", now what sort of scam is this to subsidise inefficient acriculture

Unless you live in the jurisdiction of a Kalifornia politician.
IN that case they are buying the water rights to shut it off for agriculture irrigation. If you don't live in a desert yet you soon will.

I don't mind gvt investment in some business. Orphan drugs as an example are things that need investments but the market is so small that it is hard to find private capital for R&D .

But generally ;if it's worth doing then there is private money available .Solar power ? You don't think Jeffery Immelt isn't there already with his hand out ? I would be if the government was going to give me money for things I'm doing anyway.

Wind ? The problem with wind is the availability of rare earth minerals .The magnets used to manufacture a 3 megawatt wind turbine contain two tons of rare earth minerals .

Everyone thinks we will achieve so called "energy independence" with it ,but we will still be dependent on cartel like nations for stuff like neodymium...
From China in particular .

I already linked this article in Atlantic once before when this topic came up . But it's worth reading if you haven't yet.
Clean Energy's Dirty Little Secret - Magazine - The Atlantic

[speechlesstx]

There's always some dirty little secret other drawback. Take those compact fluorescent bulbs... please. And who wants to look at this?



Apparently the Kennedy's didn't. Or how about reusable shopping bags? Yes, I'll have a little infected fecal material with my broccoli. And as tom pointed out, saving a little fish has turned one of the world's most productive agricultural areas into a wasteland.

[paraclete]

Unless you live in the jurisdiction of a Kalifornia politician.
IN that case they are buying the water rights to shut it off for agriculture irrigation. If you don't live in a desert yet you soon will.

I don't mind gvt investment in some business. Orphan drugs as an example are things that need investments but the market is so small that it is hard to find private capital for R&D .

But generally ;if it's worth doing then there is private money available .Solar power ? You don't think Jeffery Immelt isn't there already with his hand out ? I would be if the government was going to give me money for things I'm doing anyway.

Wind ? The problem with wind is the availability of rare earth minerals .The magnets used to manufacture a 3 megawatt wind turbine contain two tons of rare earth minerals .

Everyone thinks we will achieve so called "energy independence" with it ,but we will still be dependent on cartel like nations for stuff like neodymium....
from China in particular .

I already linked this article in Atlantic once before when this topic came up . But it's worth reading if you haven't yet.
Clean Energy's Dirty Little Secret - Magazine - The Atlantic

All of this takes me back Tom to the question why aren't we using some nice clean competitive oil and coal, could global warming and greenhouse gases be a communist Chinese plot? I think my country will go on exploiting its competitive advantage. How is we can survive without these rare earths?

[tomder55]

No I don't think so .It is difficult for people to do the research ,and it is becoming increasingly difficult to count on the 4th estate to be the gate -keepers.

People don't know about what it would take to convert to these so called clean and renewable energies because they have to dig to get this information. No one on the evening news is telling people that converting to wind is not the panacea it is sold to be.

[paraclete]

No I don't think so .It is difficult for people to do the research ,and it is becoming increasingly difficult to count on the 4th estate to be the gate -keepers.

People don't know about what it would take to convert to these so called clean and renewable energies because they have to dig to get this information. No one on the evening news is telling people that converting to wind is not the panacea it is sold to be.

You are right wind has it's place in the basket but we need to look beyond a one technology solution, but media is only interested in sensation not facts. If it fails spectacularly it is news, if it succeeds spectularly it is news and therefore why should we expect them to be gatekeepers or even informed. I have seen some terrible gaffs in the media