"5 Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit"
By Pejman Yousefzadeh Posted in Energy | Reliance On Oil — Comments (8) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Read it all. It would be nice to think that a Presidential candidate will pick up on these arguments and make them so that the American people learn the truth concerning the role that foreign oil plays in American energy consumption. But I am not sure that any Presidential candidate will have the courage to do that anytime soon. The only points I would add are (1) we really need to go nuclear; and (2) if you want to see a dramatic spike in food prices, you could do no better than to put all of your eggs in the ethanol basket.
(Robert Bryce's article was referred to me by Tyler Cowen.)
« Winning The Battle on Drilling — Comments (7) | Your Good News/Bad News Post Of The Day — Comments (4) »
"5 Myths About Breaking Our Foreign Oil Habit" 8 Comments (0 topical, 8 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Please do not assume that I don't support the development of Nuclear Energy. I also do not support the boondoggle of Ethanol production.
Doing nothing really isn't a good idea either. Nobody can say that being as dependent on oil as we are is a good idea. There has to be nuclear and other options. Here is a good article in Human Events: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24318
As long as oil is the cheapest energy source *and* fuel out there, I think we'd be fools to use state central planning to force people to use other energy sources.
It is folly for us to be dependent on foreign oil when we have our own that needs to be developed.
Its insane to let state planning continuously muck up our energy supplies.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I am NOT for government planning. There are some reasonable alternatives and the government has got to stop blocking them. Lack of Nuclear, coal to gas, and new refineries all are due to government roadblocks. Subsidies aren't necessary, just get out of the way.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I am almost shocked that the liberal, big-government types haven't attempted to finance their "gifts" through American oil. With prices over $100/barrel, doesn't drilling make sense in order to keep the money away from state sponsors of terror as well as reduce our deficit? I guess it comes down to which is easier and more timely.
I sent this e-mail to Mr. Bryce.:
In myth one you state we don't finance terrorism because we buy our oil from non-terrorist states. Later you get it right when you state that any oil not bought by us goes to other buyers. The price of oil is high because DEMAND is high. We keep buying, the price stays high, the terrorist supporting states make more money for their oil as do all other suppliers.
A second myth you state is that the oil sellers do NOT support terrorists. Terrorists are supported by drug, gun, slave... running, extortion etc. You are half right. Most of the money for active terrorist groups may come from crime, BUT, most of the money for PREPARING THE BATTLEFIELD comes from the oil producers. That is, Wahabbism and Salafism is promoted at great expense world wide by Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. These Madrassas and their Imams sew the seeds which sprout into Jihadists. They also act as organisers, fundraisers for the terrorists...
Another of your myths states that we can not become oil independent due to the need for backup when disasters happen. I fail to see how a disaster in the Gulf would affect oil production in California, Alaska, the East Coast, or Montana/Wyoming/Utah... Liquefaction of Coal could also be spread around the US, as should refining activities, preventing a disaster in one area from being impossible to deal with through friendly suppliers.
Basically number 4, the myth of oil independece helping reform the Arab world, is a new one. I can't say I have ever read this idea before. Of course, I do not read the New York Times as I am interested in FACTS, not left wing editorials. Only someone totally ignorant of Islam and Arab culture could make this kind of mistake.
In summary your article lacks facts and point. Please try to do your homework next time.
Vernon Kuhns
San Francisco