Green Energy

The idea of Green Ener­gy is appeal­ing how­ev­er it is still cost­ing  a lot more to pro­vide the ground work for green ener­gy.

There are many dif­fer­ent research projects that could lead to renew­able ener­gy in many dif­fer­ent for­mats.

The prob­lem is for the most part were just look­ing in the wrong places.

Case Stud­ies and Videos.

Source 

Spain has already demon­strat­ed the “unsus­tain­abil­i­ty” of “sus­tain­able” dis­trib­uted ener­gy.

The gov­ern­ment bought sup­port there by pay­ing every­one who placed a solar pan­el on his or her roof an exor­bi­tant amount. Accord­ing to Gabriel Calza­da, of Spain’s King Juan Car­los Uni­ver­si­ty, each “green job” that was cre­at­ed cost approx­i­mate­ly $800,000 per year. Soon the solar sub­si­dies began to gnaw away at Spain’s econ­o­my, and they were dras­ti­cal­ly reduced. Spain’s unem­ploy­ment now stands at 21 per­cent, and there is a chance the gov­ern­ment will default on its sov­er­eign debt. Throw­ing mon­ey at solar ener­gy and wind­mills has real costs and eco­nom­ic con­se­quences that rever­ber­ate world­wide.

You see its not good enough to just reduce the so called car­bon foot­print, because at its base sci­ence it is flawed.

The entire uni­verse is car­bon based.

So this flawed and frankly stu­pid idea that you can some­how reduce gas emis­sions by micro­manag­ing resources is sim­ply a failed and flawed the­o­ry.

Can we learn from those that tried it and failed?

That would be the smart thing to do.

Physics sug­gests that the way to har­ness ener­gy in a renew­able way would be to har­ness the pow­er of par­ti­cle physics.

That would be some­thing that would cre­ate vir­tu­al­ly free ener­gy.

The biggest prob­lem is that were so ener­gy depen­dant that free ener­gy would cause a world wide finan­cial cri­sis.

The truth may be that we have to find a way to chan­nel the vol­ume of finan­cial depen­dence on the ener­gy indus­try into a dif­fer­ent place.

When you attempt to increase the cost of ener­gy so that it is con­served it does not work because the cost is so high that the econ­o­my suf­fers and we find that the same finan­cial cri­sis ensues.

It is the Ulti­mate Catch 22 sit­u­a­tion.

If you dis­cov­er a large scale ener­gy source that can pro­vide unlim­it­ed ener­gy to the world, the cur­rent indus­try, Gas, Oil, Fos­sil Fuels, would squash it.

The prob­lems are vast because huge sums of mon­ey are being spent in fos­sil fuels, it is the world econ­o­my.

Until we find a way to tran­si­tion to a bet­ter way to pro­duce ener­gy were going to find that it is just too expen­sive to cre­ate bet­ter sources of ener­gy.

Log­i­cal­ly, it seems that the only way to make this hap­pen is to cre­ate a sub­stan­tial enough incen­tive that ener­gy com­pa­nies move away from fos­sil fuels and towards bet­ter prospects of ener­gy.

They tried to reg­u­late it, that failed.

They tried to incen­tivize it, that failed.

They tried to force it, that failed too.

Its time that the world begins to work togeth­er instead of com­pet­ing for decreas­ing resources.

It is fool­ish to keep doing the same things over and over again and expect a dif­fer­ent result.