Thursday, August 14, 2008

Obama and Energy: The Best of "Flower Power"

Under Obama, it will all get much, much worse.


"OBAMA IS RIGHT about one thing. His flower power "transformation" of the economy "will be costly." He will not pretend, he says, that it can be achieved, "without cost, without sacrifice, or without the contribution of almost every American."

What it will cost is the sacrifice of the standard of living of the middle class and working people."

All in the name of "Change We Can Believe In".......


  1. Bubba,

    You may well know that I am a pretty committed environmentalist. My views on this issue are in some conflict with my generally conservative views. I don't "free markets' protecting habitat treasures and species etc. Not very far back I would have adamantly opposed to offshore drilling in the Atlantic or around Florida.

    Two things have changed my mind, though perhaps not my heart.

    First i think we need to loosen our dependence on foreign energy sources - oil in particular. I think it has become a national security issue of major proportions.

    We are seeing now how the Europeans have become overly dependent on Russian oil. I don't want us to beholding to crack pot states like Iran or Russia.

    The second is simple environmental pragmatism. we are all seeing the impact of the increase in gas prices in many cases causing otherwise environmentalists to dropping personal environmentally conscious practices.

    The point is that I have been paying attention for 25 years and believe that environmental protection is dependent on a sound economy. It takes money to support environmental initiatives

    This is true everywhere. Once people's pocket books are squeezed, the environment suffers. People will do what they need to get along. I as a Christian can preach all I want for Christians to be more aware of "creation care. But I don't think people like me have nearly as much influence as a good economy.

    The future has to be in nuclear and renewable sources. But it will take a while.Even though it may take years to increase our supply of renewable sources. US citizens are not going to throw away their cars. We have designed the very structure of transportation around the car. I hate what cars have done to our society, but we won't replace the internal combustion engine over night.

    I think we should significantly ramp up nuclear as well.

  2. What you say makes sense, Joel:

    "We have designed the very structure of transportation around the car. I hate what cars have done to our society, but we won't replace the internal combustion engine over night."

    However, I would change "transportation" to "our society".

    Those who support a position of no additional domestic oil capture and use, no new nukes (indeed, "shut down the existing plants"), and no increased usage of coal and natural gas have entrenched themselves in an unrealisitc andunacceptable policy, one which provides de facto support for further reliance on foreign oil.

  3. Bubba and Joel,
    One thing you can count on is the increase in use of Natural Gas. It is already being geared up like you would not believe. There are gas wells going in on every corner to put it in city boy language that you city folk can understand. There are huge pipe lines being built to pressurization stations where the gas will be put under pressure to send it along it's way in a more rapid fashion. Natural gas is abundant and much more accessible than drilling for oil even here in North Texas. Gas comes before oil when drilling wells and often time there is little oil but loads of gas available. That is what T Boone Pickens was talking about the other day and this old boy has not been wrong about booms in years. I'd sink my investment money into natural gas, exploration companies, drilling companies and the producers of the same and not be worried about loosing my bucks.
    It is a sure way of reducing dependence on foreign oil and is a very clean burning fuel. Instead of coal , even clean coal, natural gas is a natural for using in power stations for electricity. Of course the enviro-nuts around the country will and have tried to find many things wrong with it in order to drive us back to cave dwelling days. It's an excuse for more taxes to fund more welfare and socialist programs , not energy development. That buys votes, energy development doesn't or at least doesn't for the crowd that Obama etal cater to.
    Wind, where it is feasible is ok but not the answer since it really doesn't put out the amount needed to light up homes much less run industries etc. There are actually very few areas of the country where wind power is a viable answer and North Texas and the central plains is one of them. The other is the coastal areas and the enviornuts will scream bloody murder when someone tries to build them on their pristine(said tongue in cheek) beaches. So us folks here in Texas will be the benefactors of such power as well as those in the rest of the central plains. Boone is right about that one as well and he is again putting his money where his mouth is.
    Nuclear power is a must as well if we are to become totally energy independent from their third rate countries run by a bunch of thugs and 12th century minded terrorist.
    Not one of the items mentioned above can solve the problem. It will take all of them plus oil in the mean time until we get geared up and rolling on the other. Unfortunately too many are still living or trying to live in a utopian world where power just suddenly appears without the cost and pain of growth.
    If we don't wake up we will become just another third rate country begging the world for energy and food. Fact is, we ain't fer frum it now.

    That's my two cents worth on the subject.