Tue, Sep 23, 2014, 11:17 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed


% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Clean Energy Fuels Corp. Message Board

  • flashopportunity flashopportunity May 1, 2012 12:43 PM Flag

    The Elephant in the Room

    The elephant in the room is global warming, which was subsequently changed to "climate change". Imho, it is the mission of the radical Obama Whitehouse, and its regulatory authorities like the EPA, to attack the use of all fossil fuels, oil, coal and natural gas, notwithstanding the fact that most Democrats in the Senate recently voted to attach the nat gas act to the transportation bill.

    If you believe that our country is fortunate to have an abundance of these fossil fuels and that we should fully utilize these relatively inexpensive, fossil fuels to drive growth and jobs in our economy, then vote for Romney. If you believe the use of fossil fuels is the culprit in global warming and that global warming is on a certain path to worldwide destruction, then vote for Obama, economy be damned. I will be voting for Romney. The science portending a coming disaster due to using fossil fuels is too unsettled and questionable to warrant destroying our economy over imo. Nonetheless, the move of long haul trucks to LNG will help mitigate the risks in any case. JMHO.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • demedici@rocketmail.com demedici May 2, 2012 10:22 AM Flag

      more like 2 day old open can of tuna in the room in he middle of sumemr

    • I never cease to be amazed at how willing some people are to waste this precious miracle of life which is the planet earth. There is not another. You cannot just go out and get another earth when this one has been ruined. The truth of the matter is that the way we fuel the wants of our lives is not at all sustainable. Some years ago, one young man and I had a discussion on this whole matter and he said it made no difference if the earth were destroyed because we would be in a better place anyway - heaven. Well, for heaven's sake! Heaven and hell are here on earth and we can create what we want to have. You who think the eco folks are off the deep end have no idea. Here we have this huge nuclear fuel source off-planet beaming all the energy we coud ever need right down to us and you call it unfeasible tho China and Germany seem to see the light, so to speak. We are foolish, foolish, foolish not to do everything possible to make sure we maintain a healthy planet. Jeez, you would think it obvious, plain as the nose on your face. I might be nuts, but you are definitely crazy to think fossil fuels are OK after all the science there is to the contrary. That's what I think.

      • 9 Replies to dianak8
      • Come up with practical alternate economical solutions instead of preaching outdated doctrine. I don't want to live in caves and walk everywhere.

        I advocate Natural Gas in all of its sources ... shale gas, coal gas, garbage gas, cow gas because it burns clean and is an integral part of the carbon cycle.

        Gee we can grow grass and grains, feed cows and people, produce methane, beef, cereals and fertilizer. All in one big circle!

        Methane is probably the closest we can come to a clean hydrogen fuel source for many generations. Pure hydrogen is lighter than methane, and that much harder to handle.

        I propose taking advantage of the abundant natural gas the drillers are producing now in the good old USA so we can build out the infrastructure to use methane efficiently. Maybe just maybe by the time we run out of gas from drilling we will have abundant sources of biomethane available, efficient cheap solar on every rooftop and windmills commemorating Boone Pickens.

      • Blah Blah Blah. Nukes, come on!

      • We have to have use the fossil fuels that are available to us now, so that in the next 100 years, an alternative source of energy can be economically developed to meet the energy demands on earth. Certainly you can agree with that? No one is saying we can go forever with fossil fuels, its not an infinite resource, however, we have it now, its the cheapest, and most benificial. I would ask that you turn in your car, stop using all plastics and rubber products, and go bake in the sun if you disagree. Lets get real!

      • <<I never cease to be amazed at how willing some people are to waste this precious miracle of life which is the planet earth. There is not another. You cannot just go out and get another earth when this one has been ruined. The truth of the matter is that the way we fuel the wants of our lives is not at all sustainable.>>

        I can perfectly well understand why you and many others have those opinions, but I personally disagree with the suppositions that underlie your conclusions.

        I don't believe we are on the verge of running out of fossil fuels. Commerciable reserves of both oil and gas are dramatically increasing in the USA, and would even be much higher if we were to open up more Federal land to exploration and production. I think we have at least 100 years of fossil fuels and growing.

        I think the science is terribly inconclusive that says that carbon emissions from using these fossil fuels are putting us on a certain path to worldwide destruction from global warming, so I think we should use these fossil fuels.

        I think renewable energy is great, but it should not be subsidized or its use mandated by the government. It should have to compete on price and efficiency just like fossil fuels have to. Boone Pickens says his personal renewable energy investment projects will be competitive when/if the price of nat gas gets back to $6/mmbtu. I am sure entreprenuers like Boone Pickens and many others, including big oil companies, who also have extensive investments in renewable, alternative energies, will be in the marketplace with alternatives as they become economical and profitable.

        The USA is incredibly lucky to have an abundance of fossil fuels that can give us an energy cost advantage for our companies competing in the international marketplace. We are also lucky to have the most technologically innovative companies in the world, including oil and gas companies, who have figured out how to extract oil and gas that until very recently was thought to be impossible to get at. I have confidence that American capitalism and innovation will continue to provide this country with energy that is cost competitive in the world marketplace if Washington doesn't interfere with it. The last thing we need is Obama and Washington coming in and mandating the use of this or that energy and artificially driving up the price of fossil fuels with new taxes. JMHO.

      • demedici@rocketmail.com demedici May 2, 2012 10:19 AM Flag

        just because some people don't want to buy the whole story that and government fix that it's happening, that it's happening because of us, and that we can fix it...doesn't mean opponents don't care about Earth.

        This is what irritates me about liberals.

      • You're an EcoSocialist like the rest of the demprogressive chattel rank and file. You Sir are the enemy.

      • Please explain how the good Mother Earth has dealt with an eternity of pollution spewwing volcanos. Is it possible that the massive eruption in Iceland last year was the cause of our warm winter ? One volcano emits more pollution than a year's worth of industrial production.

      • You are missing the point a little bit about nat gas. You let the good be the enemy of the perfect, so to speak. Gas is the most environmently friendly fossil fuel. Don't forget, you can't build solar panels without materials and energy, much of which comes from plastics etc. made from fossil fuels. Are you going to run trucks on sunshine energy? The sun does not shine all the time, and batteries are made of guess what, things which need fossil fuels to bring them to market. Further, when the sun is not providing energy, nat gas is the best backup. The wind blows at night, but is irregular, when it blow too hard, the windmills shutdown.

        Ok, now the good news, there have been several major advances in recent weeks which will increase solar panel effeciency and bring down costs!!! So economics is about to shift towards solar. Still, in the near to intermediate future, we NEED nat gas.

      • greenpeace nut job

    • With your logic, I'm surprised they let you vote.

    • Global warming/climate chg is not the issue; keeping the economy from it's full potential and getting more people to depend on government is what the radical left wants--and Obama and his administration are very much in this effort

      I too will vote for Romney, as he is a tried-and-true capitalist and wants the best for the country.

      • 1 Reply to ahrranbee
      • <<Global warming/climate chg is not the issue; keeping the economy from it's full potential and getting more people to depend on government is what the radical left wants->>

        Yes, there is no question about it that there are many politicians and businesses advocating cap and trade rules, along with the government run energy industry that comes with it, for political power and control purposes, for profit purposes and even for the purpose of meting out social justice, as was the case with Obama's communist green jobs czar, Van Jones. Some Silicon Valley venture capitalists pushed for cap and trade rules because they planned to get rich on their renewable energy ventures after Washington had artificially pushed up the price of fossil fuels and mandated use of renewables. Goldman Sachs supported cap and trade rules because they were setting up for a new trillion dollar opportunity in trading pollution credits. Many UN members supported (support) global cap and trade rules, because they see it as a way to force rich nations to transfer capital to poor nations.

    • Couldn't have said it better, except I'd say the scumocrats are (& always have been) the problem. Getting the House & Senate back is really more important.

8.40+0.07(+0.84%)Sep 23 4:15 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.