I am not sure what hydrogen fuel-cell research has to do with bands staying out of politics
Scott,
you can plainly see that I was referring to chads comments about Bonnie, not Bands/Politics
, but I visited the link Rollin' Mark provided and would like to clarify a few of the things he said:
(1) The President PROPOSED a $1.2 billion project during his state of the union address, last year. In 2003, he actually only gave out $75 million. This year, he has budgeted $350 million (see below).
Scotty,
5 year program, 1.2 billion and we are up to 425 million in 2 years, seems like that goal will meet or maybe exceed the original amount.
(2) The $350 million given this year was awarded in April. It goes to four separate programs:
(a) $150 million (over 5 years) for the creation of three Research Centers (the National Renewable Energy Center, Los Alamos Lab and Sandia Lab) and a small slough of individual projects at about 12 universities or think tanks;
Good point, The Government Research centers have to be "created" because previously, they did not exsist.
(b) $190 million (over 5 years) to create Demonstration Projects. This money all goes to the usual suspects -- Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Conoco/Phillips and BMW are one team ... Daimler/Chrysler & BP America another ... Ford and BP a third ... GM and Shell Oil yet another ... and Texaco Hyundai the last -- who really will not surrender their control of the internal combustion engine until they have total control of this technology;
Yes, but think about it, who better qualified to do the R&D?
Its either them, or a start-up who doesn't have the resources to develop the technology. Auto-makers know its coming sooner or later, so if the government "prods" them, whats wrong with that? Its the same as farm subsidies, paying farmers to overproduce to assure an adequate food supply.
(c) $13 million over 3 years for "Off-Road R&D"
No opinion on this whatsoever.
(d) and I guess a -$3 million for Hydrogen Education -- the development of middle and high school hands-on instructional materials (funny ... "hands-on" is considered an aberration in most other types of instruction),
It is?
plus teacher professional development.
A good thing.
(3) While I applaud the effort to support research in alternative energy sources, I am disappointed (though not surprised) that the effort is as small and halfhearted as it is.
At what point would you say that it wouldn't be "halfhearted"? If its so halfhearted then why was it okay that Clinton spent lesson this research? (not picking on Clinton, but whats good for the goose....)
Contrast the $350 million ($425 since 2003) to be spread over the next 5 years with (a) the amount spent in even one day on an unnecessary "war"
Your opinion, and you are untitled to it. I don't think it is unnecessary, but we'll probably never settle that argument.
in the Middle East which all but the most naive of citizens must understand is at the very least marginally connected to oil consumption,
yes, it is partly due to oil. think what would happen if some one like Hussein cotrolled somethin like 75% of the worlds oil reserves. We talking about massive Global inplications.
(b) the still secret plans of the Cheney Cabal that determined energy policies for this administration that seem to have little to do with alternate energy sources
And those *secret* plans would be what?
Wanna buy some swampland in Florida?
,
or (c) the amount of money spent by lobbyists and other financial pimps in their effort to secure enough votes to open the Alaska wilderness.
Which would equal the amount of money spent by the NEA, AFL-CIO, Trial Lawyers and a 100 other lobbyists who support the other side.
Heavens no!, put 1200 oil wells in an area that is at least 1/3rd the size of the Continental US? I could give you a map, a GPS unit, a compass, and a lifetime to find them and it wouldn't be possible.
Believe it or not, I'm a conservationist, lived in the boonies my entire life, would do almost anything to protect it, but also know that a relative few oil wells in Alaska wouldn't change a damn thing, other than the fact that we would have more domestic oil.
Whew
As to the original content of this thread -- why should "bands" stay out of politics? I didn't much like listening to Eddie Vedder get off on political content when he opened for the Stones in Oakland, but he said his piece from the microphone his talent put in his hand just like I could if I had even half his talent. If he turned off some of his fan base, that was his choice.