DIVIDED ABOUT NEW ENERGY?

This article represents the worst kind of journalism, Bill O’Reilly chicanery in print, an attempt to invent a controversy. Its going to take every kind EROEI + energy to move ahead in the 21st century.

Energy activists snipe at rivals; Technologies vie for Feds funding
Jeff Nesmith, March 25, 2007 (Atlanta Journal-Constitution)

WHO
Advocates and critics of various forms of alternative energy.

WHAT
Alternative and renewable energies, contending for research and development grants and funds, comment on one another’s strengths and weaknesses. The article’s author attempts to make it sound controversial.

WHEN
On-going debates moving in the direction of enlightenment.

WHERE
Nationally and internationally.

WHY
Is it true, as the article suggests, that a gain for one technology is a loss for others? No.
Solar energy is not, as one of the article’s quotes suggests, a “fraud” but it is still in development. Corn ethanol is probably of limited merit but second generation ethanol, called cellulosic, may have value and ethanol from animal waste may be the best kind. Though not perfected, rechargeable batteries for autos, in conjunction with the internal combustion engine, are available now and are the bridge to the future. Hydrogen is a fine fuel but expensive.

QUOTES
The future will not be dominated by one fuel but will be the domain of many alternatives.