<?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: Fracking and the Presidential Election: Drilling for Jobs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.aicgs.org/issue/fracking-and-the-presidential-election-drilling-for-jobs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.aicgs.org/issue/fracking-and-the-presidential-election-drilling-for-jobs/</link>
	<description>Providing Knowledge, Insights, and Networks for the Future</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 14:56:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: K Bledowski</title>
		<link>http://www.aicgs.org/issue/fracking-and-the-presidential-election-drilling-for-jobs/#comment-32864</link>
		<dc:creator>K Bledowski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2012 15:07:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.aicgs.org/?post_type=issue&#038;p=4898#comment-32864</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Coal, gas (shale or conventional) and renewables are all energy sources whose exploration comes with costs and benefits that are both private and public (external). This applies equally to Germany and the U.S.  The most important aspect of this is that the mix of energy consumption is a function of mostly social preferences, and to a lesser degree, technology. 

Fracking may divide the U.S. and Germany in how much shale gas is captured. But many other European countries (e.g., Poland) have embraced the U.S. approach in a more holistic cost-benefit analysis. How you account for costs and benefits makes all the difference here. 

And yes, energy has entered politics as well. Just as nuclear energy had featured in German election cycles, so does gas and oil exploration feature in U.S. polls.

My take is that there is less than meets the eye in comparing Germany and the U.S. in energy issues: local political and social pressures dictate how energy is generated, how it is distributed and priced, and how it is regulated. In the end, both societies will get what their voters tells politicians that they want.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Coal, gas (shale or conventional) and renewables are all energy sources whose exploration comes with costs and benefits that are both private and public (external). This applies equally to Germany and the U.S.  The most important aspect of this is that the mix of energy consumption is a function of mostly social preferences, and to a lesser degree, technology. </p>
<p>Fracking may divide the U.S. and Germany in how much shale gas is captured. But many other European countries (e.g., Poland) have embraced the U.S. approach in a more holistic cost-benefit analysis. How you account for costs and benefits makes all the difference here. </p>
<p>And yes, energy has entered politics as well. Just as nuclear energy had featured in German election cycles, so does gas and oil exploration feature in U.S. polls.</p>
<p>My take is that there is less than meets the eye in comparing Germany and the U.S. in energy issues: local political and social pressures dictate how energy is generated, how it is distributed and priced, and how it is regulated. In the end, both societies will get what their voters tells politicians that they want.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
