Energy for the Future Bill 2014 (Debating)

[Deus Naturae]

What are these companies going to be researching? New drilling techniques? Energy production and supply has little to do with household energy efficiency, which is related to the amount of electricity consumed by households and not to how that electricity is produced or supplied.

[Deus Naturae]

But why require them to devote 20% of their profits to R/D? That's what my original post in this thread was about. It just seems incredibly presumptuous to think that, for every energy producer and supplier anywhere in Atlasia, at any time, the optimal allocation of funds to R/D is equal to or greater than 20%. Who is to say that they and their consumers wouldn't be better off if they invested 81% of their profits into expanding production, exploring new areas for resource extraction, purchasing new equipment, etc? The great thing about the market system is that firms which allocate their resources optimally and efficiently get rewarded with higher profits, and those that don't are punished with lower profits. When the government just decides that x amount of resources should be allocated to x, there's no reward/punishment mechanism to determine the optimality of this allocation. For these reasons, I introduce this amendment:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Deus Naturae]

Aye

[Deus Naturae]

So I'm happy to juggle the numbers of the R&D component, otherwise the amendment from Senator Deus is unfriendly.

Would you be willing to amend the figure to 5%?

[Deus Naturae]

So I'm happy to juggle the numbers of the R&D component, otherwise the amendment from Senator Deus is unfriendly.

Would you be willing to amend the figure to 5%?

How about phased over three years?
5% -> 7.5% -> 10%

I'll agree to that.

[Deus Naturae]

I object to the amendment. There's no reason to pander to those who wish to undermine the intent of this bill when we have the votes to the contrary.

Why do you consider 20% to be an ideal figure?

[Deus Naturae]

Aye

[Deus Naturae]

I object to the amendment. There's no reason to pander to those who wish to undermine the intent of this bill when we have the votes to the contrary.

Why do you consider 20% to be an ideal figure?

Because it's a higher figure, compared to what is being offered now. The more money we can throw into research and development, the better.

NAY

You would support a 90% R/D mandate? What do you think needs to be researched further?

[Deus Naturae]

Nay

Requiring electric plants and drilling companies to invest one fifth of their profits in research and development (of what, exactly?) is asinine. The only companies with an incentive to invest in renewable technology are renewable technology developers and manufacturers...which aren't even covered by this bill.

[Deus Naturae]

They are not covered in this bill because they already have the incentive and therefore spend those money in R&D, I should assume. Because we need more R&D when it comes to renewable energies, we need to give other power and fuel companies an incentive - this bill.

Why would a power plant invest in research of renewable technologies? Power plants themselves don't manufacture the turbines, generators, etc that they use, they purchase them from manufacturers (ie, the companies whose job it actually is to research, develop, and manufacture equipment). You think a company whose job it is to generate electricity is just going to open up a manufacturing plant? It makes no sense to require them to research renewable technologies when their job has nothing to do with developing renewable technology.

[Deus Naturae]

Nay