I felt the need to throw in my 2 cents re oil so here we go.
Not only "should" we reduce our dependency on oil for economic
(which is a serious issue) and environmental reasons, but we need to for
national security reasons.
We must get a candidate in office, and we must
get "representatives" that have the testicular fortitude to
develop a national energy policy that will make the United States as energy
independent as possible, as quickly as possible.
Our politicians will not stop being the puppets of the oil
companies for obvious reasons. We will never see $40/barrel oil again in
my opinion due to how the rest of the world is developing and how the demand
for this limited resource is increasing and supplies are
dwindling...and they are dwindling. Oil companies need to drill
deeper, in more remote areas, develop newer technologies to get to the
oil they find, and then to pump it out of the ground.
Not one oil producing country or company wants cheaper oil. I
think their extraction and refining costs are fixed for the most part. They
will all stand idly by and watch this country disintegrate from the inside out
for the sake of profit, national interest, or
revenge.
Many developing countries who are now awash in oil, some of which have
been our adversary for over half a century, will not hesitate for
one second to turn the spigot off if they could and watch us
crumble.
Yes, we are a large consumer of oil, but it is no longer like it was in
the past where the US was the primary (perhaps) consumer of oil and oil
producing countries needed us as much as we needed them. The rest of the world
is developing and the US will be "needed" less and less by the oil producing
countries. We will shrink from being perhaps their best customer, to just one
of many. And if we become too much of an irritant, perhaps they wont even want
our business anymore. I understand we have a global oil market to a large
extent, but with many non opec countries coming into play (at least I think
there are) , that could disappear as well. Oil producing countries one
day might pick and choose who they want to sell their oil to. We are
already dealing with that issue now.
In my opinion, most if not all of them would love to see us fall
economically and militarily. Yes, we buy a lot of "stuff" and yes we are
a decent investment for many countries. Our economies are linked to some
extent. But, as time goes on, we will be needed less and less until the world
realizes they can get along just fine without us. When China itself, and
India, and Latin American countries, developing African countries, start
buying more and more stuff over the years, the less important we become.
As our politicians tell us what we want to hear about hope, change,
national health coverage, tax breaks etc., from what little I have heard from
each, none of them have touched upon a national energy policy to address the
oil "crisis." And if they have, it's BS in my opinion. Has everyone
already conceded that $100 oil is ok? What about if and when it hits $150,
$200 or more? As our nation falls, oil producing countries are building
resorts with this transfer of our wealth.
That is the greatest threat to our country, economically and
militarily.
We need a national energy policy where solar is used in those areas of
the country where it would be most efficient, wind turbines in
the areas of the country where it would be most efficiently utilized,
geothermal etc. The prices of all these technologies would drop dramatically
if we created the demand for them, prior to $200/barrel oil and $10/gal gas
and heating oil.
I do not think nuclear is a "great" option due to the quantity of
fissionable material that is required that cannot be made safe. The cost
of storage will never end so what's the real cost of the energy? I do not
think burning coal, a great resource of ours, is a great option due to
all the chemical by products. Even if we could make the "exhaust" clean,
I think we would still be left over with hundreds of millions
of tons of mercury and other noxious by products.
The proper technologies are there, they just need to be implemented on a
mass scale for the price to come down dramatically. Its simple economics. No
new house in a sun belt area should be built in the future without the
majority of its roof covered in solar panels and perhaps a small wind turbine
if the area warrants it. I'm sure they can be made to be somewhat fashionable
looking. Imagine running your air conditioner, refrigerator, and all your
electronic appliances all day through early evening at no cost, except the
initial outlay. Imagine charging your electric car for free.
I would gladly pay $10,000 initially, built into the price of a new
home to be off the energy grid to a large extent. $10,000 @ 6% interest
is only $60/mo. Who has an electric bill anywhere near $60/mo.
anymore. Plus, as time goes on, utilities will only get more
expensive to remain on the grid.
In my opinion, the advent of the computer and all the thousands of
peripheral technologies (and jobs) that have come from it has fueled the
economic boon the US has experienced over the past 20 years. I think the
next economic boon can come from alternate energy development, production
and implementation.
There was a program on TV, modern marvels perhaps, where they showcased a
Fed Ex terminal at an airport ( I think), where they had their
entire roof covered in solar panels and that supplied them with all or most of
the energy they needed to operate during the day and into the evening.
It's doable today. The technology is there now. The oil
companies don't want it to happen and now they have even more money to
make sure that it doesn't. Let them buy up all these alternate technologies, I
do not care. We simply have to take the oil needle out of our arms.
For my simple mind, the solution is simple. It just takes the will and
fortitude to get it done.
That's my 2 cents. Or perhaps it was a nickels worth. But I doubt much
more than that.
Lee