Freedom from foreign oil vs. green energy

Is it me, or have others noticed MANY politicians who are extremely adament about the US freedom from foreign oil & energy sources, also the ones that are trying to slow up/ eliminate green technologies?

Example: There is a senator here that that is very vocal about foreign oil and the need to produce our own energy/power. At the same time, he is trying to remove incentives for green technology research, and eliminate/stop the wind farms in our state stating they cause health problems and decreased property values.

This is just my observation, but curious what you guys think. Does freedom from foreign oil require green technologies or is it possible to achieve the freedom without "going green"?

P.S. Sorry about the spelling, I'm a putz today.

I have noticed that too.
However, it is hard for me to be objective about this subject because I'm in the middle of the uber hot Marcellus Shale hubub and have seen this from a few different angles.
Some of the angles are rather dirty too and I really wish we, as a country, could tap into some of the resources right here without poisoning ourselves.
Am interested in what others have to say.

Yes, it is true that the same people who want freedom from foreign oil AND are putting barriers on green energy have some interesting motives. They think that we can drill drill drill and frack frack frack our way to energy independence. While we may achieve that, in the short term, it is still important to remember that these are FINITE sources of energy. I believe many of these folks are walking hand in hand with the oil/gas companies. This is evidenced by the fact that they are so hostile towards developing competing renewable sources of energy.

Since the renewable sciences are new, technology has not progressed far enough to be able to produce energy cheaply. However, by taking incentives that are geared toward helping fund the development of efficient technology, they are planning to KEEP it expensive. That way the oil/gas (which still get incentives regardless of the fact that they are making record profits) will continue to maintain our dependence on them.

We are going to suddenly find ourselves in either of two situations that will shake us into reality.

1. We will simply run low on fossil fuels. When this happens and we have neglected our renewable energy technologies, we will find ourselves in a "begging for energy" situation.

2. We are failing to recognize that our present global ability to produce fuels is also finite. However, the demand is growing daily. Countries like India and China are demanding more oil every day. Other third world countries have standards of living that are demanding more energy as well. Soon, demand will outstrip supply creating a situation where countries will start fighting for these supplies.

This is just not that far down the road, folks. WE may not see it, but I bet our children and grandchildren will. It is just stupid not to invest NOW in renewable energy to develop cheaper, more efficient ways of producing energy.

I say, check the bank accounts of those politicians who put obstacles in front of green technology and pander to the oil/gas companies.

My idea of a wonderful world is when we no longer need to buy any oil from the middle east and can tell them to start breeding camels again.

While it is true that the amount of oil and gas are finite, there is no danger of running low for generations and generations to come. The conception that we are, or can soon become low on fossil fuels is a common misconception, but it is just that - a misconception. The amount of oil reserves that we know of that cannot currently be drilled for political, logistical, or technological reasons is staggering.

Personally, I don't know of anyone that is categorically "anti-green". I think most, if not all, people have an interest in decreaing our dependency on fossil fuels and increasing our use of energy from renewable sources. However, there is not such a hurry that we need to desperately invest in companies like Solyndra that are doomed to failure. And we need to recognize and accept that technology has not reached a point to make the use of solar and other "green" energy sources cost effective. While I understand the emotional motivations of the environmental extremists, reasonable people understand that running off half cocked is counterproductive, and we have to take things one step at a time.

In direct answer to your questions, yes we can become energy dependent without "going green". We have sufficient oil for many generations - if we can drill it. Some of it is located in shipping lanes, some of it in protected areas, some of it in areas where people don't want to have to look at an offshore rig or have a wellhead in their backyard.

I think a more appropriate question is not CAN we become energy dependent without going green, but SHOULD we. The answer in the short run is yes...we need to do what we can to reduce our dependency upon foreign oil. But the answer in the long run is no - at least in my opnion. We are in some ways so backward and self centered, it is ridiculous. I lived in Europe for 3 years when I was young, and the difference in lifestyles was (and is) striking. While the rest of the world drives small cars, we drive SUV's and pickup trucks. Believe me, I know first hand farmers and ranchers need pickup trucks, but in case anyone hasn't noticed, the F150 has been the number one selling vehicle in the US for the last 30 years. We are in my mind the most extravagent, wasteful, egotistical society in the world, it would not surprise me if half the energy we use is wasted.

We have the resources and capacity to increase our energy output from nuclear sources - but again, we are restricted by political and regulatory barriers and public misconceptions as to safety. We have sufficient gas reserves WITHOUT fracking. We still have the capacitcy to increase hydroelectric power, although there are issues there as well. We need to continue to research ways to make solar energy a viable energy source. We need to be working on all these things - but there is sufficient time to let private industry do the research and develop the technologies - there is no need for the government to invest tax dollars. From a conservative perspective, the government is in the way of progress - not fueling it, both in the development of renewable energy and the production of energy from fossil fuels.

In other words, we have a short term problem and a long term problem. Both have solutions, but the solutions are diametrically opposed. However, you can't solve a short term problem with a long term solution, and you can't solve a long term problem with a short term solution - it requires both...

Most of our energy policy is being run by 'Big Oil'. Green energy is not in their plan. Continued dependence on gas, oil and coal is their plan. They have fought the President and the Dems in Congress on every 'green energy' and 'renewable energy' source or program except Ethanol and they are profiting by it.

They want you to believe that we can drill our way to energy independence and it could happen if they were honestly concerned about America instead of ONLY their profits.

If you do not believe this is true, just Google the Petroleum industry's own sources that give the exact numbers of the millions of gallons of refined unleaded gasoline, jet fuel and diesel that the major oil companies are selling to foreign buyers instead of to Americans. They can keep our fuel prices higher and make more money while they force us to pay as much as they can get from foreighn buyers. At the same time, they are depleting our reserves to make more profits.

Look at crude oil prices compared to gasoline and diesel prices. Crude is only $85.00 a barrel and diesel is over $4.00 a gallon. The last time diesel was even near that price was when crude was over $110.00 a barrel. The difference is that they are making that much more money off of it by keeping the price of gasoline and diesel and jet fuel at record levels. They are keeping them at these high levels by selling unprecedented amounts of refined fuels -- refined in our country, from our crude oil with us living with the resulting pollution and furnishing the infrastructure, pipelines, etc to produce it to sell abroad.

They screech and scream that we need the Keystone Pipeline to bring in oil from Canada. This filthy oil (made from tar sand -- pretty much heavy tar) is the dirtiest oil on earth. We are going to run it across the Ogallala Aquifer (largest underground aquifer in the US) so we can refine it in our country so that the big oil companies sell sell the refined gas, oil and jet fuel to other countries to put the huge profits in their pockets.

So, if you want to know where 'green energy' has gone, check with big oil.

About that much touted pipeline. Last week the news was that the existing portions of the pipeline was having safety issues and has been shut down. There have been really bad issues with other existing pipelines and there is a reason to be worried about the aquifer.

But for many folks, it is to HECK with water, we want cheap delivery of oil!

Have you noticed Obamas green fiasco ? Wasting tons of tax payers money claiming he's creating all kinds of green energy jobs, only problem is those jobs are in china, as that's where all the solar cells are coming from.

I always have to bite my tongue REALLY hard when I run into clients who scream green energy, but don't want wind turbines anywhere near them. Or people who go off the deep end when there's an oil spill, and then argue for more drilling no matter the cost.
Posted via Mobile Device

The truth of the Obama stimulus money to companies is that 8% of those companies have gone bankrupt. This is less than1/3 of the number of other companies getting funding elsewhere that have gone broke while 22% of the companies that Bain Capital financed later filed for bankruptcy.

Romney claimed that HALF of those "green" companies went under. 50% is just a little bit more than 8% in MOST people's minds. But Romney never let the truth get in the way of a good statement. You are correct, Cherie, 22% of Bains companies went under. Now, who is the good businessman?