The War Of (Energy) Independence
Energy Independence is a goal that our elected officials agree on. How we achieve it is totally a different matter.
The benefits of being energy independent are stable energy prices, improvement in our balance of payments and thus a stronger dollar, an improved economy, and an improved foreign policy. Ridding America of its dependence on foreign energy would be a major defeat to the Terrorists that want to destroy us.
With so much at stake, our Government continues to fail us. Just a couple of weeks ago U S Senate Democrats were going to solve high gas prices by raising taxes on energy production (remember when you tax something it gets smaller) and today their answer to the our energy crisis is to stop excessive speculation on energy in the financial markets. Tinkering with the financial markets might be justified but it won’t solve the problem and won’t produce one btu on new production. Republicans want more exploration – a far more constructive approach that will actually produces something.
I agree with the GOP on more drilling but the problem requires an even Bigger Solution. In the last few weeks some of our biggest thinkers have likened the Energy problem to War. Recently when Newt Gingrich was in Sioux Falls he used the War analogy saying America needs a Manhattan like project to deal with the Energy Crisis. Oilman T. Boone Pickens also uses the war analogy when talking about how we must deal with the energy crisis saying it is America’s biggest problem since World War II.
Recently former Vice President Al Gore used a brilliant analogy in comparing our Challenge to that of putting man on the moon (though Gore’s plan deals only with electricity generation and solely using renewable sources of energy to stop global warming rather than focusing on energy independence).
Energy Independence requires a National Goal (as Gore suggests) and becoming Independent requires a War Like Attitude (as suggested by Gingrich and Pickens). Americans need both the focus and the willingness to sacrifice.
To become Energy Independent our Government needs to set aside all the partisanship and using energy to posture for elections and political gain. We need a national discussion and put ALL possible solutions on the table for discussion including but not limited to: Nuclear, renewables (wind, solar, bio fuels, hydro, hydrogen, algae, geothermal) oil shale, massive investments for clean coal technology, more petroleum and natural gas exploration, more domestic refineries, 21st and 22nd Century conservation technologies including battery power, hybrids and technologies we haven’t discovered.
Energy Independence must be green and without question using the best environmental science. That being said government must have expedited permitting procedures that provides that projects and processes have in depth investigation but are not used by the tree hugger or NIMBY crowd just to delay or kill projects.
John Thune’s bill S3222 – The Transition Act of 2008 is a great first step calling for more exploration, more reliance on renewables, and finding better utilization of coal and oil shale but it does not go far enough. EVERYTHING needs to be on the table. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin who has been on Speaker Pelosi’s committee, Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, recently said we need a comprehensive approach.
Sidebar – Our Congresswoman has had several positions on ANWR, most recently I understand supporting some version of it.
The War of Energy Independence is a War we should have embarked on in 1973 but as former Governor Bill Janklow often said,” the best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago the second best time is Today.”
Check out –
Newt Gingrich - http://www.americansolutions.com/General/?Page=9d64a628-d028-48c1-840d-330aea987841
T Boone Pickens- http://www.pickensplan.com/
I have posted on our Government’s failure to deal with energy prices previously All Talk No Answers and Gas Pains.
South Dakota Straight Talk
2 Comments
Reader Comments (2)
The United States of America
1. Has a divine destiny to defend democracy in every nation that currently embraces democracy, and promote democratic principles where tyranny and dictatorship runs supreme. This cannot be accomplished while the US is beholden to the very tyrants against whom it fights.
2. Has energy, whether from oil, bio-mass, coal, or nuclear power, as the life-blood of the US economy. The effects of skyrocketing fuel cost have a direct impact on the affordability of food, clothing, and shelter for every citizen, rich or poor. We must bring down the price of energy without further delay.
3. Energy policy plays a vital role in the creation of thousands and thousands of jobs. The oil shale fields alone can produce enough oil to replace our current imports and do so for 240 years. This is a minimum of 5 generations of employment for families in CO, UT, and WY. We have 250 years of coal supplies that can be converted to liquid fuel, and produce thousands of jobs.
It is time for liberal politicians to severe ties with fascist, economy-wrecking, pseudo-environmental groups and begin to do what is in the best interest of the whole of the citizens of the United States. It is time for conservative politicians to stand and make a very vocal demand for energy independence and security. And it is time for every citizen to follow in the footsteps of Patrick Henry and declare that “Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.” (Patrick Henry, 1775, House of Burgesses)
The facts on the ground are that oil prices are higher than they have ever been. Oil companies are reporting record profits. Oil companies have millions of acres of domestic oil leases on and off shore that they are not using to produce oil.
Given these facts, don't the oil companies already have the incentive (high oil prices), the feasibility (high oil prices and existing leases), and the ability (existing leases and existing profits) - to greatly expand exploration and production on leases they already hold?
I haven't had anybody explain to me why oil companies aren't producing oil on their existing leases.
1) If they have determined there is no oil there, then surrender the leases.
2) If they have not made the determination of whether their existing leases have oil on them, then by all means get out there and do testing before you ask for more land to lease. Congress better demand an explanation for why this hasn't been done.
3) If they have determined that there is oil on existing leases, they need to explain why they are not drilling it. Maybe it's economically feasible/maybe not, but Congress should call upon the oil companies to explain this.
I wonder sometimes whether the oil companies sought and acquired the public leases they have but aren't using, not to drill there but to prevent anyone else from drilling there so as to limit supply and keep prices high.
It is within the realm of possibility that the oil companies are behaving like OPEC domestically by tying up and not using public land (and offshore) leases. This is what Congress should determine, and what they learn should be publicly announced.