Driving on roads built and maintained by the state is a privelege, not a right. You have the absolute right to drive your own car on your own land without a license or a seatbelt, with no one to blame but yourself if things go tits up.
On roads that don't belong
entirely to you, considering
your taxes have paid for less than a millionth of their length,
hell no.
That said, I don't agree with static speed limits. I'd rather have adaptive or flexible limits that take into account road and weather conditions. 70 on a clear road with no traffic? Sure! 70 in the rain at night? Hell no. Again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFO
Not sure you refined your point enough. Solar/hydro/wind/biofuels energy is renewable in every sense, unless you really think it's necessary to take it to the extreme when the sun burns out.
|
Solar panels have a 35 year guarantee of operating at at least 85%. They may last fifty years, but you will get to a point where the amount of electricy produced is not worth the amount of space and maintenance required to keep the facility operational. Hydroelectric dams silt up and likewise have a maximum useful lifespan. Wind incurs a lot of maintenance downline. While operating, you get energy seemingly for free, but the start-up and downline maintenance costs are no joke. I know a few wind farms that still haven't reached the capital bteak-even point, and solar will take that thirty or forty years to even come close. Of the above, hydroelectric makes the most sense and is the most bang for the buck, but appropriate sites are limited.
Biofuels? Let's talk when the EROEI goes down to reasonable levels.
Fossil fuels are renewable. Just stop using them for a few million years and call us back in the morning.
-
In the end, everything is subsidized, and the level of subsidy is often proportional to the volume of energy produced for consumption. (I posted an infographic here somewhere, but too lazy to find it now). And the level of subsidy actually scales up based on downstream pollution and legacy costs, which means more dollars per kWatt go to "clean" energy.
Perhaps all that's needed is simply to charge consumers directly for the environmental costs of their choice of fuel and their behavioral patterns will change. Other first world countries pay a hell of a fuel tax, it's crazy that Americans do not. It would be painful, though. American society is built on cheap oil, so people live further away from everything they need than anyone else.