There are times when you need an archive of information and evidence to make an argument.
Then there are times when one simple fact or incident makes the case by itself. (Which, incidentally, may very well be the genesis of the adage "A picture says a thousand words.")
Evidence item of consequence: a lunch that global trade consultant Edward Goldberg, a colleague of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, had with a Russian trade attaché.
The Russian trade attaché, Friedman relates, years ago was delighted to hear from Goldberg that the Bush administration wanted to drill for oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The reason? The amount of oil derived would be negligible in terms of the U.S.'s needs, and it signaled that the Bush Administration was not planning to do anything to establish an alternative energy program, "which of course would threaten the economic growth of Russia."
In other words, Russia knows that alternative energy would displace oil use, and oil revenue, and reduce Russia's wealth.
Hence, by extension, by not developing alternate energy sources, the Bush administration has and is strengthening Russia, the autocratic, mono-party, anti-democratic nation that it is, led by the Czar-like Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
Energy Analysis: The Bush administration's lack of a comprehensive alternative energy program is doing exactly what is not in the interest of United States or of democratic people around the world: it's strengthening oil-rich (and increasing expansionist-oriented) Russia, not to mention Iran.
Further, along with U.S. energy independence, the above is all the more why the next U.S. president, in conjunction with the new Congress, must develop alternative energy sources. The geopolitical balance of power could literally hinge on the decision.
**
What's your view? Do you think the United States should develop an alternative energy program? Or will drilling for more oil be enough?
Let us know what you think.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-07-2008 @ 10:03AM
Mike said...
In one word "YES"
9-07-2008 @ 10:37AM
Jason said...
Give me a break, we need to supply our own oil and natural gas now while we move to alternative fuels. This includes drilling for oil and natural gas as well as building nuclear plants all of which the Democrats have been blocking for years. Don't give me the "we have areas open for drilling" because those areas either lack oil or are impossible to drill in. Go with the Pickins Plan, Oil, Gas, Wind, Nuclear, Geothermal, Clean Coal, etc....just one form of energy is not going to make it work. Plus if we do get completely energy dependent and still have oil we can sell it to the other nations and get some of our $$$ spent back. We are still about 10 years away from a real all electric car.....Electricity is not made by air alone and never will...it take a full spectrum of fuel supplies to make enough for our all electric future and it needs to be at a more reasonable cost then it presently is. Home heating bills at its present level are going to be 1000 a month for an all electric home.
9-07-2008 @ 10:45AM
JDW said...
McCain just voted "NO" to tax credits for home owners who want to install RE on their homes and "YES" to tax crrdits for Corporations to do the same damn thing ! Why do the citizens have to pay when corporations do not. These corporations just put the extra prifit in their pockets. There is no ECON 101 in this ! They can not preach "FREE MARKET" then subsidize their buddies ! This is a "TRICKLE UP" market !
9-07-2008 @ 11:20AM
don said...
We definately need to drill for oil wherever it may be. However an all-encompassing energy plan is critical - as is the policy of NOT selling any oil discoveries outside the U.S. Nuclear is an obvious choice for electricity generation. Natural gas for all large vehicles and make conversion kits available for POVs. Finally, a major push must be made on battery research towards the ultimate goal of electrifying all private vehicles with home recharging stations.
9-07-2008 @ 11:03AM
David said...
Do you honestly believe that the Dem's will do a damned thing to improve energy independence? Try putting up a windmill anywhere in Democrat controlled Vermont or Massachusetts and listen to the hoardes of transplanted liberal Dem's from Mass, Ct. & N.Y. scream about damaging their precious view or some contrived crap about harming the environment. Cover your building in a liberal town like Norwich, VT with solar panels and then watch your property taxes go through the roof because of this "improvement". Maine (now controlled by transplanted liberals from Mass.) won't register electric cars for use on the roads because they can't figure out a way to collect highway use taxes. The same types are trying as hard as possible to completely close down Vermont's only nuclear power plant and, our only other major source of clean, reliable energy, the Quebec hydro contract. You will never see any positive change with the libs in power........only higher taxes and a lot of hot air!!!!!!!
9-07-2008 @ 11:42AM
Steve said...
Of course our lack of alternative energy policy aids Russia -- and Iran, and the rest of the Middle Eastern countries. When we trade with countries that are not friendly to us we take a risk. Certainly trade can increase understanding and a desire for friendly relations, but it can also pose the potential for those less-than-friendly countries to use their leverage that they have for selling and pricing commodities we need to get other things they want, and bend us to their will. Plus, there is the additional risk, with Middle Eastern countries, that some of that money that we pay them will end up going to avowed enemies, such as Al Qaeda, that will use that money to fund their holy wars against us.
Renewable alternative energy, if it were to become a much bigger part of our energy mix, would definitely go a long way to increasing our power and independence from these oil rich countries.
9-07-2008 @ 11:58AM
ryno said...
Ohhhhhhh.....the Democrats!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ohhhhhhh.....the Republicans!!!!!!!!!!
Just keep getting bogged down in party fighting instead of doing what is right. This article is right on, we need to drill but also have a plan to make oil obsolete.
The real government loves to see the party vs. party stuff cause it takes the attention off what actually goes on, and shifts it to people who are so nieve they fight each other based on party name, NOT what is actually going down.
9-07-2008 @ 12:15PM
Kent said...
Oil drilling on our shores is a necessary plan to stave off our dependence on Russian and Arabian oil, but not the most critical one. U.S. is fundamentally oil-poor with only 30 billion barrels of known reserves or 3% of the world's supply. Since we consume 25% of the world's oil, domestic short-fall is stridently evident. In contrast, our natural reserves is known to be equivalent to 240 billion barrels of oil and coal reserves at 1 trillion barrels. Congress had better get an energy bill passed fast to develop other alternative sources of energy.
9-07-2008 @ 3:54PM
Shaun said...
I've been hearing the U.S. has enough wind space to power the entire country. I also heard we now have the ability to get energy from solar power cheaper then oil and coal.
We have no reason why we can't be rid of oil and coal in a few years.
http://www.stocks-simplified.com
10-06-2008 @ 1:25PM
Stan said...
.
Our economy is in a sorry state of affairs I feel directly related to the high cost of fuel which affects everything from loss of jobs to a record loss of homes not to mention the rise in cost of all consumer goods.
We have become so dependant on foreign oil that we have neglected to fully utilize such natural sources of energy such wind power & solar power. Along with modern technology such as plug in cars, hybrid cars, v2g technology ,and regenerative braking, technology we still seem to be floundering as a nation as to devising the best plan utilize all that is available to us and lift ourselves out of this mess we are in. We need to take our closest look at which candidates put our economy and energy crisis at the forefront of their agenda.
Interesting site should you be interested.
www.themanhattanprojectof2009.com
9-08-2008 @ 1:02AM
Gary said...
Bush is the energy president. Wind energy sky rocketed during his administration It is now 1% of our energy. it was dead during Clinton. Look it up. We have the largest Wind Farm and the largest increase of wind energy in the world. At the present rate we should over take Germany and become the largest wind energy producer in the world in 2 years. We now have 13 SEER AC. The car CAFE standard raised from 27.5 to 35 and now SUVs and small pickups are included. All forms of alternate energy are taking off. All this is undeniable - Look it up. We need ALL forms of energy. The argument oil drilling will not produce any oil for years. Well it will be 8+years before solar will produce 1% of our energy. So should we stop Solar? The correct answer is - drill now, increase safe nuclear (None dead in USA), Shale oil, More: wind, solar, methane from landfills and chicken manure, geothermal, ocean energy, conservation, etc. Let's do EVERYTHING to stop oil imports.
9-08-2008 @ 12:17AM
Carl said...
My thoughts on global warming in my mind would be the solution to so many other problems. We can stop it! But we have to stop consuming natural resources. The earth has supplied us with an abundant amount of energy. Energy is created by perpetual motion. The earth constantly spins. The Sun always shines. The wind will always blow. The oceans will constantly make waves. And if that is not perpetual enough I wouldnt know what is. We cant stop it!
But we can kill it, and thats what we are doing. Depleting our home of it’s natural resource. Yesterday was the time for a change but tomorrow is all we got to look foward to. So my solution to this problem would be if EVERYONE would use the free energy that our home is offering. We might be able to save this home for future generations.
Think of it this way as well, this is a random thought but think of it this way as well. The ice caps reflect sunlight thats what keeps it cool. The forest are moving in absorbing more instead of reflecting it. Solar panels absorb and reflect. If every home was to help reflect wouldnt that kill two birds with one stone?
So us as the consumers we are cant we consume one thing and go green?
http://goliath0825.com/blog/2008/09/07/global-warming/
http://www.goliath0825.com