Al Fin puts the case for further development of traditional fuels and shale:
The oil and gas industry could be creating even more jobs if the United States had more of a pro-development policy for traditional energy sources instead of a government-driven, heavily subsidized, green energy approach.
… as well as unconventional liquid fuels:
In terms of what GTL is, it is the process of chemically turning natural gas into cleaner-burning liquid products, including fuel, base oil for lubricants and feedstock for chemicals.
The two things I’ve never understood are why the issue must be so polarized and how government can make such a hash of green fuels. I understand how they make make a hash but not to this extent, e.g. the wind farms. Now wind is a perfectly good idea and there’ve been windmills for donkeys’ years – so why do they suddenly become impossible to build and manage, with the people in charge on 6 figure salaries?
Why can’t all contribute – nuclear, hydrocarbon, shale, oil, wind, whatever? On the other hand, if ethanol kills agriculture, then why bother?