dlunn’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  SOU Energy speech

  Bush proposes 20% reduction in gasoline use in 10 years, or 20 in 10 -- if the speed limit were made 55, we'd have 20 in 1. Start there, and then raise the speed limit as fleet mpg warrants -- that would keep the heat on Detroit, and all other car manufacturers too.On They're up posted 2 years, 9 months ago 7 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  It's All About Market Share

  The real battle in Washington is over who will control future energy in this country -- so of course, a coalition of major energy companies and their allies is going to propose a regulatory regime that favors the status quo, and gives these corporations time to secure their own future, which they want to be the same as it is now, in control of the nation's energy distribution. On Sounds ... whaaa? posted 2 years, 9 months ago 17 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Crunchalicious Hippie Ur-Wisdom

  As to belated discoveries of hippie ur-wisdom, here is an article from the Financial Times titled: "The Hippies Were Right All Along."

  You can read it here --

  http://neweconomist.blogs.com/new_economist/2006/01/happi...

  (not my blog)On A lifelong conservative questions his hatred of hippies posted 2 years, 9 months ago 5 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Why don't they get serious?

  I don't know that anybody in Washington is serious about greenhouse gas and energy use reduction.

  If they were serious, speed limits would be 55. That could have been done yesterday, and would reduce national gasoline use, if I remember this right, by 20%. Taxes on the purchase of fuel efficient cars could already be rebated, and/or taxes raised on purchase of guzzlers. Gasoline itself would have a much higher tax on it. Tax credits for home solar installations and upgrades would be institutionalized. On and on, the relatively painless and proven effective measures that nobody in Congress seems to be pushing for.

  I fear that the real action in Washington is over who will control future energy. Big oil, electric and gas utilities all have a huge stake in this, and as the status quo is damn lucrative for them, they are all trying to stop any progress, any change. They particularly fear distributed power solutions, as that strikes at the very heart of their control over future energy.

  It's really a struggle for market advantage, and any meaningful measures will be opposed by whichever companies see those measures harming their market advantage.

  It's a situation that cries out for an independent energy commission insulated from political and corporate pressure, but I don't see anybody in Washington calling for that either. It looks like nothing will happen until the present system breaks down altogether, and when that happens we'll all be equally screwed.On Pelosi snubs Dingell posted 2 years, 9 months ago 4 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Dare I name one?

  Things of value that "the alternative to the free market" has produced... WTF do you mean by alternative? Oh well, let me take a stab at this:

  First category -- things that are government subsidized:
  Roads, gasoline, heating oil, electricity, crops, airports, airlines, nearly every drug you have ever taken, lumber, cotton, and just about the whole infrastructure of the USA owes its existence to government subsidy.

  Second category -- clean water, clean air, and the whole natural world.

  Look, go and read Adam Smith and you will see that free markets never drew a live breath, governments immediately interceded and so your idealized "free markets" are socialized markets, artificial, manipulated and bastardized. Get over it.
  On Rising tortilla prices in Mexico point to a usual suspect posted 2 years, 9 months ago 23 Responses