Replies

Well, isn’t that just mighty pious of them? Leaving the resources in the ground is supposed to “preserve” them for future generations, but what is the rationale for the resources to be extracted then?

Petroleum became the big resource it was because another resource was coming in very short supply, whale oil that was used for lamplight. Kerosene was so much cheaper, and widely available, that the whale oil industry disappeared almost overnight. And with it, of course, the extreme pressure on the population of whales.

Of course, the world has never gone back to the hunting of whales for the oil content, even as the price of petroleum has been driven inexorably higher. But there has been much expanded use of natural gas, which used to be a “useless” byproduct of petroleum extraction.

That is the point - what is now considered to be “waste” or “trash” could very well be tomorrow’s new energy resource, and the misplaced desire to “preserve” Nature’s bounty actually depresses the economy, destroying innovation and application.

My short discussion with liberals on this topic start with a simple question: Do you think we will have alternative energy sources as our primary energy sources in the next 40 years?
Virtually every one will say "yes" (as would many on the Right).
Then my machine gun reply:
So demand for fossil fuels will be greatly diminished? Yes
So the price and value of fossil fuels will be greatly diminished? Yes (many will reply with a gleam in their eye)
So one day, likely in our children's lifetime, we will not need fossil fuels at all? Praise Mother Gaia, YES!
So fossil fuels will be worthless then? Yes.
But fossil fuels under US soil are currently worth trillions today? Um, yes.
And leaving them there until they are worthless would simply waste many trillions of dollars of national treasure? Well, yes but...
And with more sources being found almost every month, we could not possibly drill or produce every bit of it in the next 40 years, even if we started today, right? True...
So no matter what happens, we will have some underground supply of fossil fuels? Yes.
Then you agree that we should use what we have now, when it is at its peak value, and use those trillions of dollars for creating jobs and maximizing tax revenues, so that we can get to alternative energy sources that much sooner, with as much benefit from those fossil fuels as possible, before they are worthless, right? Yes, well, no. Huh? I don't... You're just a racist imperialist pig. I'm going home.