Quote:
Originally Posted by mudwhistle
Problem is the Dems are standing in the way of what we can use now hoping to force somebody to come up with new sources that haven't been invented yet. Nobody has any viable alternatives that will replace oil in the next 20 years. It may be 20 to 30 years before anything else is implemented if ever.
So while Russia, China, and everyone else is reaping the benefits that oil brings we here in the US will be prohibited from using what we already have. The Democrats are intentionally ushering in the decline of America as a world power just so they can make their friends in the Sierra Club happy.
|
I suggest you take a spoonful of reality and get off the "DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS" BS. Any increase in domestic production that would be seen from increased offshore drilling--if anyone actually drills--would be outstripped by the increased demand by the time it came to market. Would it help? Sure. Would it put us on a path to energy independence? Hardly. The facts bear out that money would be best spent on alternatives to oil, than to waste it and time on increasing domestic oil production.
Just as many say we should have been increasing our domestic production decades ago. I'm saying we need to move away from oil altogether, now. Continuing to forestall reducing our dependence on oil with debates about whether we should increase domestic oil production, or biding our time seeking more domestic oil, is only going to have a negative affect.
This has nothing to do with the Sierra Club, this has everything to do with energy independence.
Take some time and read what the
experts have to say, and stop listening to folks like Gingrich, and McCain; hell even swift boater T. Boone Pickens has woken up to smell the coffee.
Impacts of Increased Access to Oil and Natural Gas Resources in the Lower 48 Federal Outer Continental Shelf