Nope. Not what I said or insinuated whatsoever. In fact all of your parentheticals suggests to me that you didn’t actually read what I wrote, are reading-comprehension disenfranchised, or perhaps that your preconceived notions are so foundationl to your reasoning that you can’t be bothered with facts. At best your position appears to me to be very muddled and shows evidence of a dearth of critical thinking skills.
First off, oil is NOT the sum total of U.S.A’s “energy” equation. A lot of liberal enviro-wacko tree-maters move their lips in such manner to make it sound as if the “solution” to our “oil” problem are electric automobiles. If one took all the autobomiles off the road and replaced them with electric types, what would happen to the power grid? What happens to the power grid there presently during the summer time?
I’ll concede that there are issue concerning environmental regulations pertaining to building additional electric-power plants, and petroleum refineries. I’ve already stated that presently refineries are operating at 83$ operational capacity (@ 14 Mbbl/d input - 5 Mbbl/d are domestic supply). So how will additional refineries solve the problem?
Where do you suggest that the differential in crude oil inputs can be found? I’ve described physical limitations of known reserves, not arbitrary constraints imposed by environmental regulations.
I don’t understand your position where you state that “It sucks that if we had dared to begin 40 years ago we wouldn’t be in this spot today.” Dared to do what 40 years ago? It sucks that capitalism dictated that 40 years ago it was cheaper to get oil from the ME rather than any other source? What was the price of oil 40 yeas ago?
You think it sucks that 40 years ago domestic gasoline and all petroleum byproducts should be priced against a minimum of $30/bbl THEN? Your last paragraph make me believe that you’re in the 4th or 5th grade and are trying to break out of the liberal indoctrintion that you’ve been exposed to at government school centers; but that lacks any critical thinking whatsoever. It would seem to me that you’ve replaced a bankrupt liberal pie-in-the-sky utopian environmental yearning for a Edan redeux with some other sort of unrational perspective.
The fact of the matter is tht we do NOT have sufficient oil reserves for you needs. Nor do we have sufficient electrical power generating capacity for our needs (at present) and continued growth demands a 4% annual increase of the existing capability. Hydroelectric, wind, solar and nuclear will NOT meet our needs in the immediate and forseable future.
The fact of the matter is that we can’t dig up the whole country for the coal that we have and is absolutely required as fuel for the electrical power we need presently (nevermind changing the entire country over to electric cars). Nor is nuclear the answer to the energy problem. We already have an issue of waste that exists, and the fact is that there’s about 100 years of known reserves avaiable GLOBALLY to satisfy global demand for electrical power generation.
Nuclear power MIGHT be a viable option given the reserves that are known to exist IF nuclear waste can be reprocessed. And tree-maters would have NO issues about that whatsoever, if but for re-processing nuclear waste has nucleasr weapons proliferation aspects, i.e., creation of weapons grade plutonium. I’m not certain about the specifics, but re-processing of spent fuel would allow re-use of existing waste material to be re-used 3, 4 perhaps 5 and maybe even 5 times. How do you feel about N. Korea reprocessing spent nuclear waste?
How do you feel about a law that mandates electrical power generating companies charge for their services such that a normal $22/month electicity bill becomes a $200/month bill (I pay $22/month for my monthly 235 KwHr of juice). However, suppose that by law the electric power SUPPLIERS were required to pay $500/month for the same 235 KwHr/month juice from “independent” providers. “Independent provider” is anybody who puts up a wind turbine and is connected to “the grid” where excess power is put into “the system”; that person gets credited for the difference.
That’s what’s happening in Germany. Presently in Germeny there are solar panels everywhere you look (including all up and down the highway medians and embankments). I wonder what sort of automobile accident liability that comes with. Like weeds the wind turbines are sprouting EVERYWHERE, and I mean EVERYWHERE.
They have more enviro-wackos over there per capita then we do, and yet they are STILL short of their electrical needs by 30%. SO they buy the difference from France which is 80% nucler reliant.
The fact of the matter is tht unless we figure the global power problem pretty quickly, we ALL are in a world of hurt.