Lasted edited by Andrew Munsey, updated on June 15, 2016 at 1:48 am.
Discussion page for Article:Gore's Ten-Year Renewable Energy Plan is Achievable
Congress:Top 100 Technologies -- RD: Directory:Ten-Year Renewable Energy Plan >Article:Gore's Ten-Year Renewable Energy Plan is Achievable - The New Energy Congress is taking up the challenge to show how it will be possible to achieve the goal of 100% of U.S. energy coming from renewable energy sources within ten years, (PESWiki July 25, 2008)
John Stephen Releases Plan For American Energy Independence - IndependenceCandidate Offers 9-Point Plan To Boost Energy Production, Cut Cost Of Oil And Gas (PoliticerNH July 29, 2008)
From Len Hartkemeier, Wednesday, July 23, 2008 6:23 PM
The points that I would make in the document asking for money for a ten year green energy independence plan are:
#New Energy Congress and its associated Web sites are already recognized and respected sites for the collecting and sharing of new energy ideas
#The members of NEC are respected, knowledgable and experienced experts in the new energy movement. NEC's contributor base is made up of both academic experts and knowledgable enthusiasts.
#The use of an open forum to receive, comment on, analyze and decide upon the technologies assures the broadest participation and most complete review of technologies.
#This open forum may bring out new and better ideas.
#The development of a comprehensive plan requires all of the elements listed in 3 above.
#By accepting only technologies that can be proven practical, the stigma of "crazy new energy ideas" can be assuaged.
#The use of NEC, with such a broad base of contributors, assures that the plan will be viewed as scientific and not political.
#By opening up the process, Gore's organization can be seen as more desirous of the "Best" plan.
#The more input, debate, analysis, and tech integration in the plan the more "bulletproof" the plan.
# The developent of the plan in this way allows Gore to be a leader without having to wear the second hat as developer of the plan
#A continuing open forum allows later modification and improvement as technology evolves. And it is open and transparent to all
Obviously more meat can be put on each point.
The plan development process should include:
#Contributions of ideas
#Reference to background material, description of tech details. Since many suggestions will not be well known to all, assembly and sharing of info will be required
#Integration of elements (if needed)
#Editing of plan elements based upon comment
#Some body (probably made up of both NEC members and Gore people) to approve elements of plan.
#Public comment and ??VOTING??
More to come,
I tend to agree with this evaluation - Gore Speaks, TV Swoons Over $3 Trillion Energy Makeover - For someone offering up an incredibly expensive proposal that would radically alter the entire U.S. economy, it's astonishing that Al Gore faced virtually no skeptical questions when he sat down with CBS's Katie Couric and NBC's Tom Brokaw to push for a $3 trillion conversion to 100% use of wind, solar and other renewable power sources by 2018. (Media Research Center July 22, 2008) Al Gore's motives are not nobel. He is interested in lining his own pockets at our expense. At least Boon Pickens is honest about his objectives. He says so in his commercials that he is in it for the money. Al Gore is in it to establish the new world order and take away our quality of life. See what he has done to his wife and you decide if you want your life in his hands. If his process was noble, I'd back him. I know him. He is not interested in our welfare. (RLP)
There was an error working with the wiki: Code wrote:
What I think we should do is let this be a grass roots effort, revolutionizing the entire industry through several disruptive technologies. By disruptive technologies, I mean the term introduced in the book, "The Innovator's Dilemma" by Clayton Christenson. Below is a paragraph from Wikipedia on disruptive technology.
The term disruptive technology was coined by Clayton M. Christensen and introduced in his 1995 article Disruptive Technologies: Catching the Wave, which he coauthored with Joseph Bower. The purpose of the book is aimed at managing executives who make the funding/purchasing decisions in companies rather than the research community. He describes the term further in his 1997 book The Innovator's Dilemma. In his sequel, The Innovator's Solution, Christensen replaced disruptive technology with the term disruptive innovation because he recognized that few technologies are intrinsically disruptive or sustaining in character. It is the strategy or business model that the technology enables that creates the disruptive impact. The concept of disruptive technology continues a long tradition of the identification of radical technical change in the study of innovation by economists, and the development of tools for its management at a firm or policy level.
The target for the disruption of technology would be the large, centralized energy companies like PG&E and also for transportation.
I think the most promising transportation technologies are Directory:Hybrid Vehicles or even pure Directory:Electric Vehicles for automobiles such as in the Directory:Tesla Motors, Inc. and basic hybrids already selling on the market. The automotive market was boosted by 2 things: High gasoline prices and the allowance of certain single-occupant hybrid commuters into diamond lanes in California. When hybrids are coupled with solar photovoltaic plastics, they will be true gas sippers.
As far as power generation technology, I think the best candidate for a true disruptive technology that has a solid recreational enthusiast base is Low Energy Nuclear Reactions, formerly known as Directory:Cold Fusion. Here's the best website for that technology: LENR-CANR.org LENR-CANR.org