Generally speaking we are against subsidies but, as always, define “subsidy”. If you mean punitively discriminating against carbon-dense energy by disallowing the business and development tax breaks all manufacturing and extractive industries get then forget it, that’s just plain stupid. If, on the other hand, you are talking about the absurd largess poured upon solar- and wind-generation over the last 4-5 decades then yes, cease and desist immediately.
Fifty-four percent oppose doing away with subsidies for oil, gas, coal, nuclear or renewable energy, while 47% favor the idea. Support for building more nuclear power plants has fallen dramatically.
The American public is divided about whether to eliminate federal subsidies for any form of energy and is giving less support to nuclear power and U.S. funding of renewable energy, a new poll has found.
Fifty-four percent of respondents opposed doing away with subsidies for oil, gas, coal, nuclear or renewable energy, while 47% favored the idea. Support for building more nuclear power plants has fallen dramatically, to 42% from 61% in 2008.
The Yale-George Mason University poll being released Thursday found that 76% of Americans support regulating carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas pollutant and that two-thirds believe the U.S. should pursue policies to reduce its carbon footprint.
Support for federal funding of renewable energy appears to be slipping, perhaps in response to the bankruptcy of the solar manufacturing company Solyndra, which had received federal loan guarantees.
Nearly 80% of Americans support federal funding of renewable energy research, but those who say they strongly support it has dropped to 36%, down from 53% in 2008. In addition, those who say they oppose the funding has more than doubled to 21%, up from 8% in 2008.
From a review of events over the past sixty-six years (2012-1946 = 66 yr), it appears that the fear of “nuclear fires” consuming Hiroshima on 6 Aug 1945 compelled world leaders to immediately:
a.) Unite Nations, and in the future to
b.) Hide Information on energy that ignites “nuclear fire”
The UK’s Royal Society, the US National Academy of Sciences, the United Nations and the Noble Prize Committee seem to have worked together to discredit reliable new information on:
1. “Natural nuclear fires” on Earth in 1956
2. “Nuclear fire” in the Sun in 1975, . . 2005
3. “Slow nuclear fires” in cold fusion in 1989
4. “Natural nuclear fires” in planetary cores
The rest of the story, as I see it, is documented here:
http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-31
Since 1946, almost every major field of science has been compromised: Astronomy, astrophysics, atomic physics cosmology, climatology, nuclear, particle, planetary, and solar physics.
I encourage you all to respond there so we can benefit from the diversity of opinions.
Thanks to real scientists, skeptics like you,
All is well today,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://www.omatumr.com/
http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/
These polls are for the ignorant because they offer no alternative in the poll for people to consider. What if I polled those same 76% of people who say that they support CO2 regulation and offered them the choice between being taxed for their carbon emissions or being provided with clean energy that would be cheaper than their current energy? I am sure they would prefer the second option.
This government has done nothing to develop technology that would liberate citizens from government control and people have been misinformed by the government as to possibilities for alternative energy because the greedy politicians want the tax revenues and the control over the voting public. We need to demand that the government be held accountable for developing technology that is liberating and not based on more taxes. Why isn’t that discussion and consideration on the table?