Replies to post #73700 on Intel Corp (INTC)

[mas]

Your input has been appreciated and you're right, at least a dozen of wbmw's posts have been of this ilk. Perhaps those contentless snipes could have been removed without detracting from the debate by the moderators. He's the first to scream personal attack yet ....

[Koog]

spokeshave, re: Now I seem to remember why I quit posting to this board.

You have summed up the problem with our energy policy (or lack thereof). An intelligent energy policy must be based on practical approaches rather than political approaches. This discussion has, IMO, shown how terribly politicized the energy situation has become. Creating a solid energy policy is an economic and national security imperative, not something to be batted about in a political round of badminton.

In another life, I worked for a large regional electric utility that was heavily invested in nuclear generation. I know that what you have said about the generating source is true.

We must invest, research and deploy ALL forms of energy sources: nuclear, wind, solar, tidal, natural gas, etc, to get ourselves off the oil teat.

In the meantime, we need to use coal nat. gas and oil to get us through the time needed to develop new resources (and build new nuclear plants). Every source helps, but only nuclear offers the generating capability to enable us to maintain our lifestyle. (I'm in the process of installing a wind turbine on my property ... I live in a natural wind "tunnel" in mountain foothills. Sure wish I had my own gas well, though ;-)

[wbmw]

Re: I made it clear in my post that I do support research into other energy sources. I stated that very clearly.

That's what I thought, but when I stated this, you got all defensive. Obviously, you want a conversation, but on your own terms, going at your own pace, in the direction that makes your point. When I try to segway into something I find important, you get all offended.

Let's try something different. We have a common ground here, so let's build off of that.

Re: I also stated that those other sources are of limited value for reasons that cannot be solved by development.

Here's where we differ. I think history has proven that investing in almost anything can result in improvements in costs, efficiency, usefulness, and availability. "Maximum limits of physics" is a cop out by those who have given up trying. Like my old college professor who told me I shouldn't bother looking for a job in the semiconductor industry because THE LAWS OF PHYSICS absolutely positively prevented making transistors smaller than 100nm, and so that industry would collapse by the end of the 20th century. Now we have devices made from billions of transistors half that size (in one dimension) in high volume manufacturing.

Never underestimate ingenuity, new materials, new discoveries, and new ways of doing things. The next break-through in solar, wind, and tidal may be just around the corner, but needs a means to lower the barrier for private firms to invest in it.