[goldstategop]

I support government subsidies b/c I see it as a national security issue: we need to break our dependence on foreign imported oil.

America’s national security is far too important to be left in the hands of the markets.

[thackney]

Having the government select which technology to subsidize is not the best means of energy independence.

It is more likely to make us worse than better.

[arthurus]

Government subsidies are a misallocation of capital. It is wasted money. Instead of subsidizing exotic but not really usable technology the government should be not hindering the discovery and production of hydrocarbons. Within the jurisdiction of the United States is enough hydrocarbon for a couple of centuries and that will continually increase as technologies improve. And that's not even mentioning coal which is, for all practical purposes, unlimited. Hydrocarbons probably are not the final say in energy but their enthusiastic exploitation will keep the economy going so that a next stage can be discovered and/or developed.

Shutting down the economy to save the snails will ensue that there will be no real advances toward more efficient power sources, and more efficient i.e. cheaper power is the necessary goal, not greener or more politically friendly but only more efficient energy. Eating up assets to produce nonviable or less efficient energy simply delays the time or prevents it altogether when we transition to that next step of practical and cheap Fusion or something totally else.

[logi_cal869]

(speechless)