Low oil prices will stymie innovation, proving disastrous for the environment. - Inspired by renewable energy analysts

Unfortunately, I have to agree. But we should be conscious of the fact that all industries will suffer now. However, as John Woolard, chief executive officer of BrightSource Energy, a solar company, says in the article, the long-term future for renewable energy is still there. Energy technology will be the next big tech boom, and it quite possibly could pull us out of this mess eventually.

Simple answer, make alternative energy sources that are cost- competitive with oil (without artificial increases like taxes, etc.) or at least make the break-even point for changing two years or less and more people would use them.

I don’t think it is a secret that supplies are limited and finding alternative sources is a necessity. As Rachel cited, the long-term need for these alternative sources will not go away. Given the current market and financial state of many operations, it may not be full steam ahead for alternative energy researchers/companies, but the process will not stop. It will be a struggle, as most things are these days, but those committed to finding alternative sources will do so and benefit from their persistence in the long haul. To think that energy technology is the next big tech boom is pretty exciting.

High oil prices create inflation, decrease disposable income, increase costs for businesses, and lower capital available for R&D and innovation. You could easily argue that high oil prices are much more devastating to business growth and the economy as a whole which negatively impacts innovation. The incentive to innovate still remains, even with higher oil prices.

There will be less incentive for consumers to buy higher efficiency products, but I think that the sparks of high energy prices have ignited a fire of innovation. The key will be if there is enough of a market for some of these innovations.

Congress should have taken advantage of the high prices and increased CAFE standards and increased other minimum efficiency standards, instead they sat around and did nothing fearing it would cost their party some election (I am looking at both sides of the aisle).

And who says that $80 a barrel for oil is a bargain. I still don't consider that low oil prices.

Fifty years ago, no one drilled for oil off shore, it wasn't profitable. We knew that oil was there but didn't care because it was too expensive. With the advent of OPEC (higher oil prices) and dwindling supplies, it is now profitable to go after that hard to get oil. Currently, renewable energy sources are like that hard to get oil. It is there but we don't care because of the cost. Whatever makes renewable energy profitable will make us go after it, whether it is high oil prices, dwindling supplies, subsidies, advances in technology, or unforseen future events. We are driven by commerce.

--
E Wilson

Many of us seem to conveniently forget that oil prices are determined by supply and demand. Early in 2008 "experts" were predicting $7/gal gas. Why is gasoline less expensive now? Demand is down and stockpiles are increasing. When prices were high, the call was for OPEC to step up volume. Now that prices have receded, you can count on OPEC cutting output. Too many people are sucked into short-term thinking for a long-term project. Blame our instant gratification, fast time culture. It takes years for new wells to produce. It takes decades for nuclear power plants to be built after wading through the regulatory and licensing requirements. People are, today, erecting peronal use wind turbines and placing solar panels on their buildings. Forget oil and move on.

Many of us seem to conveniently forget that oil prices are determined by supply and demand. Early in 2008 "experts" were predicting $7/gal gas. Why is gasoline less expensive now? Demand is down and stockpiles are increasing. When prices were high, the call was for OPEC to step up volume. Now that prices have receded, you can count on OPEC cutting output. Too many people are sucked into short-term thinking for a long-term project. Blame our instant gratification, fast time culture. It takes years for new wells to produce. It takes decades for nuclear power plants to be built after wading through the regulatory and licensing requirements. People are, today, erecting peronal use wind turbines and placing solar panels on their buildings. Forget oil and move on.

Much as I admire Thomas Friedman I don't agree with him here. What has changed is people's expectations on what can and needs to be done to the global carbon-based economy. Low oil prices after the financial crisis in late 2008 are linked to low demand due to the global economic recession. In a global recession most companies will be looking to cut costs and an integral part of that will be to lower their energy needs. In this recession the production and distribution system will be re-engineered in ways that lessens the world's carbon footprint. Thomas Friedman has the development of alternative energy technologies as his core solution to improving the environment. The development of alternative energy technologies is problematic with long lead times and the high cost of development - meanwhile more and better use of wind and solar power will continue in a recession for major users because they have to cut their costs and their carbon dependence. In a recession new ways of doing things come from necessity and this could actually accelerate an improvement to our global environment.