Why all the criticism about making money from the "green revolution"? If this is supposed to be a capitalistic society, shouldn't the alternative energy sector be able to make money as well. I thought (according to the right) that everyone should have an opportunity to "get rich". If it means making this a better world by decreasing pollution to our air, water and soil and reduce our dependence on a nonrenewable resource.
Should the "green industry" be allow to make money (without the unnecessary criticism by the right)?
Anything that is a threat to the established mega-corps will be driven into the ground- especially in the energy field.
Would that include the 'Solyndra' solar people? The only problem with making a fair profit is that tax payers paid dearly for that one. And the Solyndra "Greens" go o china to manufacture and we pay for the whole shabang! Meanwhile unemployment rises , we lose more manufacturing jobs . But Yup ,the geens made a profit there !
it is important that the "green industry" make money as it will help in coming up with ways of empowering communities that do not use green technologies. Am very sure that most of the green industry are there to fight the current trend of destroying nature so as have a sustainable society.
Of course they should make money if they can!
The problem is that they CAN'T -- they need handouts from the government to be profitable. Any scientist will tell you that fossil fuels are the cheapest, most efficient energy sources available.
Why is my money going to businesses that waste wealth?
Evan, any comment on the $17 billion in hidden subsides to US coal between 2002 and 2008?
Or subsides to nuclear power which rather than cash involve transfer of construction costs and risk to tax payers.
Um, seriously. I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again - there is NO modern energy form except coal that spread into wide use without substantial government subsidies, and even coal has now benefited enormously from subsidization. If oil production wasn't subsidized, we'd be spending about $15 a gallon. Nuclear and large-scale hydro power would probably not even exist without the government-funded R&D and building projects that created them.
It's silly to argue that green energy is not economically viable because it "needs handouts" when it receives only a tiny fraction of the subsidies given to fossil fuels.
Yes they should be allowed to earn from good deeds.
True! The mega-corps ruled this planet and any reigning government. Of course, (if the mega-corps were smart), they could get on the green bandwagon and make this world better for everyone -- especially for the future generations!
And why do you think they haven't?
Answer: Because, it's not profitable enough for their interests. They will remain with what has been able to masterfully created huge amounts of wealth, without having to better the planet.
By the time they are finished eliminating the resources of the planet, then they will have no choice but to do so.
The last thing they want is more people making money, because if more people were making money then there would be less for them to make, especially if those people were making money by creating products, goods or services, that which would take away from their primary business(revenue generating sources).
I've already outline a couple of things which continue to happen and why they continue to happen. You can find it in my hub about "why is world peace not happening?".
One answer to this question ~ Wind Towers , ! Why should each ; local ,state and federal Tax revenues be allowed to build white elephants on the ridgelines all across America by giving tax breaks from property , income , cost of manufacturing , cost of installation and operation . And THEN by ordering power companies to purchase the power from unrelyable sources at premium plus costs ? If the power company figures thier cost of producing power at ,lets say Hydro dams at 9 cents per kilowatt hour , and then have to pay ,by law, 28 cents per KWH to wind farms ..... explain how that is evironmentaly feasable in the sense of reducing costs and making energy more affordable. Environmentaly feasable or not. Subsidizing political correctness is not the answer. Another for instance ....It would be great to see the greens make money- but not by paying higer prices for an electric hybrid car that gets 10 percent more gas mileage and then increases the usage of coal for electricity by five or ten percent.......wheres the green there ? 'Solyndra' the solar company that recieved $$$$$$ from this administration and then went belly Up!
Will effect the cost of attaining green jobs for years ! .....I know ,I know but they made alot of[greens ] profit there ,didn't they?
It is a fact the companies like Exxon have bought patents on things like batteries explicitly to have them never see the light of day.
I would love to see regulation on energy companies that could prevent this.
by HuntersWhitt5 years ago
With all of the uproar over gun laws lately, I'm curious to see what HubPages thinks. So here's the question:A) What guns, if any, should be allowed?B) Do "gun laws" actually accomplish anything?
by PR Morgan5 months ago
Do you think teens should be allowed to drive at 16 years old?
by Lgali8 years ago
How many hours kids should be allowed to play any electronics games e .g DS etc,
by Credence24 years ago
Hi, folks, the link that I provide is from an article written by Patrick Buchanan, not one of my favorite guys. He is blunt in his opinion and I think just as wrong. http://news.yahoo.com/pentagons-surrend …...
by alexandriaruthk3 years ago
Do you think Snowden should be allowed to return here in the US?
by Valerie Washington5 years ago
Do you think women should be allowed or are fit to become preachers/ministers?This has been a sore subject in my family.(I think they should). Some people believe that women do not have a place in religion as a minister...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.