EDITORIAL: Energy falsehoods

Preferably not before we actually have viable alternatives available. Additional oil in the interim will minimize the "pain" of the transition, though certainly not eliminate it. The answer will be developed in laboratories; but, that has not happened yet. The answer is not "blowin' in the wind".

As both firetoice and SDindependent point out most Americans are merely ignorant regarding America's potential for energy. Unfortunately, both are just wrong. There is oil energy for dozens and dozens of years. We cannot use wind to generate our energy effectively except make Pickens a hugely rich man. And we can, if we wish, get off oil by converting to nuclear. With nuclear power and recycling spent fuel, we have enough energy at about 55 cents per kilowatt (operating cost) to last for thousands of years. And just using uranium without even touching thorium. We can use nuclear energy to "manufacture" hydrogen and even gasoline. And it doesn't require any additional lab work. The technology exists, is proven, and is highly efficient. It doesn't require massive increases in food prices, backup power plants, and retooling just about everything (if that can even be done in our lifetimes). And, oh by the way, nuclear is the greenest of the green and doesn't kill birds (for those that still believe in Rachael Carson and that wind mills are not life threatening to avians).

The snake oil sales would fall precipitously when and if the media began comparing the TRUE COSTS of these so-called alternative fuels to those of fossil fuels in the production of electricity, something our lying national media has carefully avoided doing. Already the states which have 'mandated' that their utilities buy power from 'alternative' sources have seen the electric bills of their citizens zooming upwards. In some places these bills have soared beyond $500 per month for a small house, and over $1000 for houses around 2500 square foot size. Scams like these proposed by Pickens and other green hustlers seek to force the taxpayers to pay through the nose to subsidize the building, operation and humongously costly maintenance of these windmills. If they were so great private finiancing would have been available for them long ago. ALL actual costs should appear in the monthly electric bill, but won't because crooked, greed-driven politicians like Pelosi and Reid will see that the TRUTH isn't told to the people. The only TRUE answer at the moment happens to be the continued use of FOSSIL fuels, and continued scientific experimentation into possible CHEAP alternatives. In the meantime, the green stone age wannabes, and sleazebag hustlers like Pickens should be told to go sit in the corner and SHUT THE F UP!

The American public is not fooled by Pelosi's blatant lies. This wicked witch of the west is arrogant, disgusting and is most probably corrupt as well considering how she stands to profit from high energy costs. She and that hack from Nevada Reid could care less about what the clear majority of the people are demanding. They owe their souls to greenies like SD independent below. I'm all for alternatives myself but they are in the future and/or yet to be developed. In the meantime, we need to take advantage of the resources we do have. I'd be willing to bet that OCS, ANWR and oil shale would equal the entire reserves of the middle east. We won't know until we go for it and anyone that is against it should be thrown out of office for sending $700 billion out of the country to folks who don't much like us. If the Russian aggression in Georgia, Chavez's escapades, etc. does not sway them, their continous blocking dramatically endangers the security of this country and borders on treason.

The question is not whether we can replace "transportation" fuels with alternatves. Of course we can even if we go the Obama route - pushing with our hands albeit made easier with fully inflated tires (hence his program to put a "tire pressure guage in every car"). The question is one of economics. So far nothing in existence is more economical than oil and natural gas. And as long as we have those resources and the economics is such that it is, we should use the resources we have. It is clear that the Democrats care nothing about economics (or is it just a question of understanding) when it comes to energy. It's all about the environment. Even as Democrats push for alternatives they turn right around and do whatever they can to block alternatives. No ugly wind turbines in site of a Kennedy. No nuclear anywhere. Need thousands of square miles for wind turbine farms? Prepare for the lawsuits to stop the infrastructure such as the untold miles of cables and roads that have to accompany such farms. And if you manage to get the farm built and a turbine to spin and some stupid bird crashes into a turbine? The environmentalists scream like it's the end of the world. Wind and solar are a long long way off in terms of efficiency. In the meantime Democrats rejoice in their policies that push the price of gasoline and gas ever higher and higher. It's no coincidence that gasoline costs increased by an average of 14 cents a year under Bush until 2006 when Democrats took over Congress and has now increased by around $1.50 a gallon for gasoline. Remember that the Democrats promised "common sense" energy legislation when running in 2006. We voted them in and now we know that they not only don't understand economics. They don't even know the difference between "common sense" and "nonsense".

Energy independence NOW is the issue. It has become a national security issue. The technology to meet current energy demands is not there, worse yet, the infrastructure to support alternative energy demands is years behind the technology. Our energy independence needs are NOW. If Israel neutralizes Iran's nuclear capabilities and Iran blocks the Straits of Hormuz in conjunction with a sympathetic Venezuela who could decide to sell all their oil to China, the price of oil isn't going to be the issue it's going to be the supply. Russia is the only significant military power on the planet that is energy independent. Pelosi needs to recognize this risk to national security or accept the responsibility for consequences to not just the U.S. but to our allies (Europe). If Russia uses energy as weapon again, our European allies have not alternatives but to jump away from NATO and join a Russo-Euro Security Coalition. Putin is viewing control of the BTC pipeline, as much as 15% of Europes imported demands for light crude and knows that at least 25% comes from the Middle East. Let Nancy calculate how much global leverage that is for Russia if the Straits of Homuz are blocked or even threatened. Her thinking is a national security risk.

Keep holding her feet to the fire, with a little luck she will return to just another do nothing Democrat in Congress after next January.

rtk_51: The problem is that they aren't necessarily a "do-nothing" Congress. They can still do a lot of damage if they get the off-shore drilling embargo extension slipped into a "continuing resolution". I'm all for shutting down the government if they try.