<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: McCain&#8217;s $300 Million Energy Stunt</title>
	<atom:link href="http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/</link>
	<description>Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 05:56:10 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Ron Paul&#8217;s Car Trade-In Tax Credit Plan Promotes Fuel Efficiency</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-411403</link>
		<dc:creator>Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Ron Paul&#8217;s Car Trade-In Tax Credit Plan Promotes Fuel Efficiency</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:45:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-411403</guid>
		<description>[...] expensive autos in the first place, it&#8217;s going to hurt adoption rates. That&#8217;s why I called it a stunt when he proposed [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] expensive autos in the first place, it&#8217;s going to hurt adoption rates. That&#8217;s why I called it a stunt when he proposed [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim S</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410372</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:09:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410372</guid>
		<description>I agree with Tully on the X-Prize approach being a good one. Don&#039;t assume that the major manufacturers would win, either. I&#039;d like to see Claire McCaskill contact Peter Diamandis and have him and Obama sit down and chat about how to create a public/private partnership to do this kind of thing across the board for multiple places where we produce and consume energy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with Tully on the X-Prize approach being a good one. Don&#8217;t assume that the major manufacturers would win, either. I&#8217;d like to see Claire McCaskill contact Peter Diamandis and have him and Obama sit down and chat about how to create a public/private partnership to do this kind of thing across the board for multiple places where we produce and consume energy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tully</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410347</link>
		<dc:creator>Tully</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 14:59:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410347</guid>
		<description>The &quot;X Prize&quot; idea, good. Beats hell out of subsidizing research directly--let others gamble THEIR money chasing the pot o&#039; gold, and you get a lot mroe bang for the taxpayer&#039;s buck. 

The credit-to-companies rather than to the consumers? Bad. I&#039;m not even happy with the idea of a consumer credit, but a company credit is downright stupid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The &#8220;X Prize&#8221; idea, good. Beats hell out of subsidizing research directly&#8211;let others gamble THEIR money chasing the pot o&#8217; gold, and you get a lot mroe bang for the taxpayer&#8217;s buck. </p>
<p>The credit-to-companies rather than to the consumers? Bad. I&#8217;m not even happy with the idea of a consumer credit, but a company credit is downright stupid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Japan To Cut Solar Panel Costs By 50%</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410315</link>
		<dc:creator>Donklephant &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Japan To Cut Solar Panel Costs By 50%</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 01:25:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410315</guid>
		<description>[...] my post today about McCain&#8217;s $5,000 a car tax break giveaway to the auto manufacturers who make and [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] my post today about McCain&#8217;s $5,000 a car tax break giveaway to the auto manufacturers who make and [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pdx632</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410299</link>
		<dc:creator>Pdx632</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:16:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410299</guid>
		<description>I have been waiting for some &quot;rich dude&quot; to make an offer like this for some time. What I was envisioning was $1B to the first person who could develop a commercially viable engine system that could travel 100 miles with a &quot;consumables&quot; expense of $4 or less and have at least a 400 mile range. 

Once we have a winner, I would take the design and license it to ANY car maker to use on any car manufactured IN THE USA. I would use the licensing fee to develop other &quot;clean&quot; energy systems, maybe &quot;clean coal&quot; technology.

At least McCain is trying to be pragmatic in this area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have been waiting for some &#8220;rich dude&#8221; to make an offer like this for some time. What I was envisioning was $1B to the first person who could develop a commercially viable engine system that could travel 100 miles with a &#8220;consumables&#8221; expense of $4 or less and have at least a 400 mile range. </p>
<p>Once we have a winner, I would take the design and license it to ANY car maker to use on any car manufactured IN THE USA. I would use the licensing fee to develop other &#8220;clean&#8221; energy systems, maybe &#8220;clean coal&#8221; technology.</p>
<p>At least McCain is trying to be pragmatic in this area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jimmy the Dhimmi</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410294</link>
		<dc:creator>Jimmy the Dhimmi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 20:23:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410294</guid>
		<description>No tax breaks for &lt;em&gt;any&lt;/em&gt; &quot;green&quot; technology producer?  Or just the evil car companies?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No tax breaks for <em>any</em> &#8220;green&#8221; technology producer?  Or just the evil car companies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: kranky kritter</title>
		<link>http://donklephant.com/2008/06/23/mccains-300-million-energy-stunt/comment-page-1/#comment-410281</link>
		<dc:creator>kranky kritter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:53:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://donklephant.com/?p=6098#comment-410281</guid>
		<description>If only we could travel back in time, have Obama make the exact same offer, and see how you&#039;d react, Justin.

In the absence of a time machine, look within. If this had been Obama&#039;s proposal, would you be so quick to class this as just a stunt, or would you instead work hard to see the positives in trying to spur innovation and so on and so forth. Answer honestly.

I think a case can be made for such a public prize having value beyond the one you describe as not really necessary(creating incentive). It would symbolize our national commitment, for one. It would attract a greater pool of potential innovators to include the basement lab folks, who might come up with some sort of crazy idea that someone else could develop into a working solution.

It would inspire kids still in school, and teachers in science classes could talk about the virtues of a government prize instead of the evils of greed and capitalist enterprise. :-)

It could be used as an educational vehicle to familiarize folks with the real issues we face regarding energy supply and the important issue of portability.

I&#039;m happy to notice that it has the elements of a gimmick to it. Cheerfully granted. But we could do way worse than inspire folks with prizes for solving important problems. If there&#039;s one improvement I&#039;d make, I&#039;d like to see such a program funded by having a big public telethon where folks put aside their differences and agree to support the effort to make better batteries, and we create an extra-governmental fund that is filled up with money from all kinds of folks. 

I like the idea of some sort of symbolic &quot;we&#039;re in this together&quot; effort. Not because it&#039;s the idea of some particular candidate, but because that&#039;s the sort of attitude that we really and truly need to foster. Arguably, we need a change of atittude and the identification of some common ground as much as we need the better batteries. I think if Obama had proposed this, you be all over how it&#039;s a fresh approach and would change the environment and so on.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If only we could travel back in time, have Obama make the exact same offer, and see how you&#8217;d react, Justin.</p>
<p>In the absence of a time machine, look within. If this had been Obama&#8217;s proposal, would you be so quick to class this as just a stunt, or would you instead work hard to see the positives in trying to spur innovation and so on and so forth. Answer honestly.</p>
<p>I think a case can be made for such a public prize having value beyond the one you describe as not really necessary(creating incentive). It would symbolize our national commitment, for one. It would attract a greater pool of potential innovators to include the basement lab folks, who might come up with some sort of crazy idea that someone else could develop into a working solution.</p>
<p>It would inspire kids still in school, and teachers in science classes could talk about the virtues of a government prize instead of the evils of greed and capitalist enterprise. :-)</p>
<p>It could be used as an educational vehicle to familiarize folks with the real issues we face regarding energy supply and the important issue of portability.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m happy to notice that it has the elements of a gimmick to it. Cheerfully granted. But we could do way worse than inspire folks with prizes for solving important problems. If there&#8217;s one improvement I&#8217;d make, I&#8217;d like to see such a program funded by having a big public telethon where folks put aside their differences and agree to support the effort to make better batteries, and we create an extra-governmental fund that is filled up with money from all kinds of folks. </p>
<p>I like the idea of some sort of symbolic &#8220;we&#8217;re in this together&#8221; effort. Not because it&#8217;s the idea of some particular candidate, but because that&#8217;s the sort of attitude that we really and truly need to foster. Arguably, we need a change of atittude and the identification of some common ground as much as we need the better batteries. I think if Obama had proposed this, you be all over how it&#8217;s a fresh approach and would change the environment and so on.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
