I actually work for an energy corporation. CORPORATION!! ENERGY!! I only yell it to send Pitt and jiml to hiding under their beds. And if there was green technology anywhere remotely efficient and cost effective, who do you think would be pouring money into it? That's right, the people and corporations who have the MONEY to do it. So I assume you don't know what you are talking about when you write anything that has to do with the economy, finance, energy, the past, the future, and what a corporation is.
'Subsidies' go to ethanol, solar, and wind energies, because they make no money, but the government wants someone, anyone, to keep working on them. A point that actually has some merit, if done correctly. Oil companies do not get subsidies. They get what exploration, power, mining, milling, and manufacturing companies all get - tax deductions the same way you get a deduction on a mortgage - to encourage improvement and offset the cost of more efficient methods and machinery. So when you mention subsidies for big oil, you are wrong.
Oh, and please stop saying 96% of scientists agree - it's an absurd and made-up number, that has to have idiotic filters in place to make it work. Try science; it's a good framework for adding knowledge. When you squeeze it into self-absorbed partisan hacks, who's motto is "The facts don't fit our assumptions, so the facts are wrong", or even worse, the get-rich Goracles and cronies, you are moving into the far reaches of stupid.
4/24/2013 2:43 AM (edited)