Grassroots Network of the Republican Party of Virginia

Virginians for Energy Independence


Virginians for Energy Independence

I created this forum for those who which to discuss and promote Energy Independence ideas for Virginians.

Members: 37
Latest Activity: Apr 21, 2010

Discussion Forum

Pols make a (Yucca) mountain out of a molehill

Started by George Daily Apr 5, 2009.

Energy Taxes 1 Reply

Started by George Daily. Last reply by Ray Waddell Mar 1, 2009.

Federal Control of Power

Started by George Daily Feb 24, 2009.

Smart Electric Grid 1 Reply

Started by George Daily. Last reply by Mark Collins Feb 5, 2009.

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of Virginians for Energy Independence to add comments!

Comment by Ray Waddell on January 14, 2009 at 2:30am
“Republicans demanded Mr. Chu be a more forceful advocate for nuclear energy. Mr. Chu promised to accelerate the disbursal of loan guarantees that his agency is authorized to give to companies seeking to build nuclear reactors. In response to Democrats' unease about the expansion of nuclear plants, Mr. Chu said his agency needed to develop a better plan for waste disposal than the Yucca Mountain depository in Nevada.”

If this report is a reasonable description of the testimony of Chu, his testimony is disingenuous double talk. The Yucca Mountain depository plan has been approved for over a decade. It’s one of those programs that has been bought, paid for, and could work. It is opposed and being delayed from implementation by legal maneuvering and the hostile stance of the powerful Senate Majority leader. Its delay of implementation is one of the great reasons more nuclear plants are not being put on the desperately needed path to energy “independence”. What better plan would Chu develop -- perhaps firing the waste off into space? Not a bad idea if the “duds” were guaranteed to land on the nuclear plants in Iran.

If my assessment is wrong, I need to be set straight. If my remarks are on the mark, we need to find an equally and preferably superior credible authority in this field of endeavor to pin Chu “to the wall” and champion the “go ahead” on Yucca Mountain and another “Manhattan “ project.

One would think that in the national Republican “arsenal” there would be someone that follows this issue for purposes described above. If not, there certainly should be. Or am I it?
Comment by Ray Waddell on January 13, 2009 at 10:21am
Dear Mark,

You will find authoritative support for your lithium battery comment in Robert Bryce’s, “Gusher of Lies - The Dangerous Delusions of ’Energy Independence’”, ISBN 978-1-58648-321-0. Addressing complex national issues takes work. On the whole, our culture is disdainful of the work needed for an intellectual in depth understanding. Unless you can give it the “silver bullet” or “fifteen second” solution, you’re won’t be heard.

The “threads” on this site are mired in the energy problems associated with the personal transportation vehicle, the automobile. It’s reflects our “what’s in it for me” attitude. Not that that isn’t a natural and “good” thing. It’s just falls short of the enormity of the problem. The big picture for the 22nd Century will be the efficient, economical delivery of goods and materials (not people) by high speed, electrically powered, unimpeded monorail across our continent. There will be no long-haul trucking industry. To do so requires a high output grid that currently only nuclear power can deliver. France knows this and is so far ahead of us in this field that it is an embarrassment to remember that I joined in on the “fad” to ridicule her just a few years ago when she was hostile of our policies in the Mid-East.

We are in deep “do do”. We have no long term direction. It’s the here and right now. If you’re alive today, you have no future. Unfortunately, we have spent out prodigy’s (the yet to be born) future too.

All of what I’ve outlined will fall should demographics take a virus “hit” and nature’s pandemic solves our problem.

Regards, Ray
Comment by BowlMeOverVa on January 13, 2009 at 7:14am
Comment by Mark Collins on January 12, 2009 at 8:49pm
I recently saw a report that says that if we went to strictly electric cars we would be even more dependent upon foreign suppliers than we are now. The lithium for the batteries themselves is supplied from abroad and every car would need it.
Comment by William James on January 11, 2009 at 12:36pm
I agree with Mark's previous assessment. The governmentshouldn't be legislating 'mandatory GPS units' or purchases of automobiles based on incomplete scientific data. I intend to stay clear of all 'mandated' government intentions unless it is put to a statewide debate and referendum.
Comment by Mark Collins on January 11, 2009 at 9:36am
Excellent article Ray. It remains to be seen if technology can change the future of the electric car but until it is promising enough to create private investment we should steer clear of it.
Comment by Ray Waddell on January 11, 2009 at 6:14am
Posted For Information

Comment by Mark Collins on January 10, 2009 at 3:16pm
There should be no reward for citizens buying a particular type of car. Any reward penalizes those who bought what there free choice led them too. The government has no right to pick what we should or shouldn't drive. If a cars price plus its efficiency makes it a better bargain people will buy it.
Comment by Lester Gabriel on January 10, 2009 at 3:00pm
A far simpler way of rewarding those who buy fuel-efficient cars is to reduce the registration fees on those cars which exceed a certain level of either miles per gallon or level of emissions per gallon. The fees on those vehicles below a certain level would increase to keep revenur neutrality.

Les G.
Comment by Sandy Cope on January 10, 2009 at 2:20pm
Bill- From what I understand, everyone would be required to have a GPS installed on their vehicle.

Members (36)









(sales help fund this site)




© 2021   Created by Tom Whitmore.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service