![]() |
|
#41
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
Why should they? I couldn't think of a better way to protect your cash cow than the multibillion dollar entrance fee of an oil platform and the multibillion dollar refineries. Developing solar panels would be suicide because it allows competition due to low cost of entry. [/ QUOTE ] What I meant was, why are other unrestrained, private enterprises not entering the energy competition, especially if there is such a low cost of entry as you put it. |
|
#42
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
What I meant was, why are other unrestrained, private enterprises not entering the energy competition, especially if there is such a low cost of entry as you put it. [/ QUOTE ] There is only a low cost of entry once the tech is developed. R&D will cost a few billion. The only people that are capable of dedicating that much money are those that are in the $3 trillion dollar energy industry and governments. The energy industry has spoken loud and clear. They did it in the days of streetcars and they are doing it now. |
|
#43
|
|||
|
|||
|
Also, when you say
[ QUOTE ] "multibillion dollar entrance fee of an oil platform and the multibillion dollar refineries" [/ QUOTE ] I'm curious if you are aware how many of these multi-billions in entry costs are a result of government regulation (regulation on exploration, import taxation/tariffs, restriction of refinery construction and output, costs of permits, licenses, lawyers, labor regulations, environmental regulations, etce etc etc ) all of which greatly inhibit competition, reduce any incentive to lower costs and prices as would happen in any fiercely competitive market, and lead to, as you put it, cash cows. |
|
#44
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What I meant was, why are other unrestrained, private enterprises not entering the energy competition, especially if there is such a low cost of entry as you put it. [/ QUOTE ] There is only a low cost of entry once the tech is developed. R&D will cost a few billion. The only people that are capable of dedicating that much money are those that are in the $3 trillion dollar energy industry and governments. The energy industry has spoken loud and clear. They did it in the days of streetcars and they are doing it now. [/ QUOTE ] If the existing energy industries have the capital to invest in R&D for alternative sources then it is in their best interest to do so. They can set the cost of entry as high as they want through the patent system. There is a relatively brief time horizon for fossil fuels, and if they don't find successors then they are far more shortsighted than the businessmen I work with. |
|
#45
|
|||
|
|||
|
Riddick, I am very well aware that the oil industry uses the government. Just look at the OP. If you calculated middle eastern stabilization costs the price of gas would be around $4.50 a gallon. If you have links you would like to show me feel free to post them. However, preach anarchocapitalism or pseudo-anarchocapitalism all you want but it simply won't happen. I think even you, pvn borodogg, and natedogg can agree with that. So you have to work with what we are given. And given our available options, don't you think a energy manhatten project is a simple yet effective sollution? Grant funding in the energy field certainly has a good track record. Keeping things realistic, what better way is there to increase capitalism and competition?
|
|
#46
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
If the existing energy industries have the capital to invest in R&D for alternative sources then it is in their best interest to do so. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's not. reread this post http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1 watch this video http://www.kicktheoilhabit.org/ Then think about how long these CEO's are going to live. I don't know how else to say it. I'm drawing in crayons here. |
|
#47
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] If the existing energy industries have the capital to invest in R&D for alternative sources then it is in their best interest to do so. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's not. reread this post http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1 watch this video http://www.kicktheoilhabit.org/ Then think about how long these CEO's are going to live. I don't know how else to say it. I'm drawing in crayons here. [/ QUOTE ] Your understanding of business is apparently learned from crayons and AC threads. IF you dont understand that the time horizon of R&D projects in energy/Pharma/defense and telecom..the businesses I work with...is so far beyond the lifetime of current management it isnt worth discussing business concepts with you. Go back to your energy conspiracy theories and links to self serving experts. |
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
There is only a low cost of entry once the tech is developed. R&D will cost a few billion. [/ QUOTE ] There are many industries that did not get under way until a great amount of capital was first invested by profit-seekers. Why is providing energy to hundreds of millions of people different? [ QUOTE ] The only people that are capable of dedicating that much money are those that are in the $3 trillion dollar energy industry and governments. [/ QUOTE ] Why does it take trillions of dollars to invest a few billion? There are over 50 private American universities that currently have multi-billion dollar year-by-year endowments. There are a handful of venture capital firms with over $1 billion funds. There are numerous charities with multi-billion dollar funds (alternative energy has become a cause, afterall). I hardly see how only government funding (theft) can accomplish research and development of anything that ultimately hundreds millions of people are going to want to consume. |
|
#49
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
energy/Pharma/defense and telecom..the businesses I work with [/ QUOTE ] Ah...that explains this post "there is no consensus that it is attributable to humans. " http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1 and this post http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1 Now your factually incorrect rants make sense. BTW, I work in Pharma, I have a very good understanding of how it works. |
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
|
As far as technology I'd say that the transistor; nuclear technology; and space technology are at least 3 of the most important areas of technological development in the last 80 years or so. I think it's fair to say that U.S. government sponsored research has been vital for all three. I also think that it's probably fair to say that research spending skewed towards defense has also been vital for all three. I could be convinced otherwise though.
|
![]() |
|
|