Jump to content

The Next Really Cool Thing


Guest kumar
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest kumar

Tom Friedman of NY Times talks about energy. Since billions are being spent on energy research and hundreds of billions in energy generation, there may be new investment opportunities and we need to understand their impact on BRK subsidiary:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/opinion/15friedman.html?_r=1

 

..to prove that it can, under lab conditions, repeatedly fire its 192 lasers at multiple hydrogen pellets and produce more energy from the pellets than the laser energy that is injected. That’s called “energy gain.”

...the next step (if it can secure government and private funding) would be to set up a pilot fusion energy power plant that would prove that any local power utility could have its own miniature sun — on a commercial basis. A pilot would cost about $10 billion — the same as a new nuclear power plant....President Obama’s stimulus package has given a terrific boost to renewable energy.

...systems that could give us abundant, clean, reliable electrons and drive massive innovation in big lasers, materials science, nuclear physics and chemistry that would benefit, energize and renew many U.S. industries.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JackRiver

Tom Friedman is a hack very similar to how Meredith Whitney is a shill.  He's a parrot and she's a puppet.

 

If you want to make money in the future it would be better to focus on why what I'm saying is true than focusing on alternative energy.

 

Yours

 

Jack River

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack,

 

You are right.  Trying to invest and make money is science projects (like alternative energy projects that are not economically viable or only are so via gov't subsidy or regulation) is like investing in biotech with questionable rewards.  At least for now, biotech's rewards are valuable protected drugs.  Tom Friedman is an interesting observer but his recommendations or spending billions of dollars on alternative energy engineering when the science is not economically viable is a hairbrain idea.  The Chinese must be laughing there heads off.  The US will spend billions of dollars to develop a technology so when oil prices rise that we can use and develop and sell to the rest of the world.  Meanwhile, the US will regulate (via cap and trade) manufacturing jobs to us as we can continue to purchase low cost oil and gas.  These folks that think science experiments will produce jobs and lead us to a green economy are out to lunch.  When was the last time the gov't/experts predicted what the right technology was going to be in 10/15 years?  Its not that they don't try, it is just an impossible job that many will not admit. 

 

I am also disappointed with administrations small business initiatives.  These guys don't understand small business and it is scary that they think they do.  I am small business owner with a group of other guys and so far every initiative announced has either had a neutral or in some cases a negative effect.  The largest negatives are higher taxes, no incentives to invest and higher costs via any cap and trade scheme.  One item these guys either don't get or are ignoring is that many small firms are S-Corps or LLCs.  So many of there tax savings (such as recaptured losses from the past just do not apply to these entities) and increasing taxes on the "wealthy" owners has the same effect as increasing taxes on the business.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...