At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
My question is this: Why do conservatives take such a pessimistic approach when it comes to developing clean renewable energy? The problem I have with conservatives is that they claim patriotism but the things they promote makes me think don't have faith that we can figure this problem out. I feel optimistic that we can achieve anything when we put our minds to it because America is a great country, while it seems conservatives want to continue down the same old path that obviously isn't working.
No tirades or negatives about liberals, I want positives about conservatives. Giving a short answer that drilling is the better is not acceptable to me and will not be considered a well thought out answer.
I think it's more a case of big business having a stranglehold on the government. Big oil fills up some pockets on Capitol Hill to further their interests. Conservatives have just taken it a notch higher.
You can suggest what we write...... But, we're gonna ignore you, and write what we want anyway.
Conservatives think doing anything green will cause major dislocations in our economy. Rather than being entrepreneurial about it (which is what you'd THINK they'd be), they want to leave things be. Of course, they have a huge stake in the status quo - the oil and automobile industry.
They're afraid of "change". That's what conservative means, after all - to conserve what we've got - don't rock the boat.
I will highlight what I think answers your question :
Quote:
If we added domestic oil to the market then it would have an instant impact on the trade deficit as petro-dollars would come into the country instead of leaving the country .This would have the effect of strengthening the dollar .... Which in itself would help on the prices of all goods and services in the US.
Drilling and increased refining would add jobs ......high paying jobs......"jobs Americans will do " . So I do not understand the Democrat resistance . To me it is a no brainer . It will buy us time to transition to a time when their panacea of a petro-carbon fossil fuel free energy source is viable (if ever ).
Seemingly every country that has any supply at all is exploiting it. We buy oil from sand imported from Canada. Canada and Mexico are 2 of our 3 largest suppliers. Why shouldn't we exploit our own resources ?
Drilling domestic oil would only make us energy independent if it is part of a comprehensive approach that includes oil, natual gas ,coal ,nuclear ..as well as investing in future technologies. ( although I would reconsider this idiocy of turning food into fuel) We cannot acheive energy independence by drilling alone. But drilling and refining in tandem with conservation;increased efficiency in autotechnology ,nuclear power ;clean coal ;natural gas ;certain sensible biofuels (converting corn into fuel not being one of them) and development of the renewable future energies is the path we should take.
Even the threat of drllling has had to a small degree ,an impact on the prices because commodities investors are betting on future supplies. To me it is a no-brainer to increase domestic production , in concert with increasing refining capacity .
Solar and wind are not able for the forseeable future to produce enough power to repalce that now generated by fossil fuels.
Of at least as much interest is the efforts of back-yard engineers who are working on separating hydrogen from water. Already, it is possible to boost gas mileage by adding HHO into the IC engine.
Oil works its proven, its estalished. Increase supply, though that may not be immediate.
Same thing for coal, for nuclear, for hydroelectric. - proven baseline energy sources.
There is no infrastructure to carry energy generated from windmills in the plains or solar panels in the desert to the rest of the country. At this time, these can not be relied upon to provide base energy [ windless days, cloudy days etc..]
Just like investing though, the best bet would be to diversify and develop ALL these sources.
as well as investing in battery / storage technology or harnessing electricity from lightning etc...
Oil works its proven, its estalished. Increase supply, though that may not be immediate.
Same thing for coal, for nuclear, for hydroelectric. - proven baseline energy sources.
There is no infrastructure to carry energy generated from windmills in the plains or solar panels in the desert to the rest of the country. At this time, these can not be relied upon to provide base energy [ windless days, cloudy days etc..]
Just like investing though, the best bet would be to diversify and develop ALL these sources.
as well as investing in battery / storage technology or harnessing electricity from lightning etc...
I can agree with diversifying and that of course going with the same ol' same ol' is easiest. What really reaaaaallly irritates me though is that a lot of people complaining about the gas prices are the people who are still driving the BIG vehicles. My neighbors have a 16 passenger van with a "Drill here Drill now" sticker slapped on the back and ya know what? Having five children was their own choice. Does it warrant opening a national forest to drilling? No.
It's so odd to hear people complain when we are still paying half of what a lot of other countries pay per gallon. You know what patriotism is? Do more to conserve energy. I know people who commute 40 miles to work just because they "like" the people they work with. One of my friends turned down a job close to her just because she didn't feel like changing, so she continues to drive to the neighboring city. If people are still not making lifestyle changes because it's inconvenient, I don't think the gas prices are the issue. Do I want the government to rush out and save me when I know that I myself could do more personally to save on gas? No. In America we build where we want and do what we want and now we have sprawled our concrete all over this beautiful country. We try to save the last stretch of unspoiled wilderness and can't even manage to do that. When it comes down to it, most of the people complaining could do more on a personal level... but just aren't.
If all this is being directed against MCCain/Palin, I could have sworn that I heard
McCain say we need to use wind, solar, natural gas and more drilling. What did I miss here?
PS. Conservatives are pessimistic? Who is it that said, "we can't win, lets quit", "more drilling won't help" "It'll be 10 years before we get any benefit from more drilling" (I question that time span). Who says "we can't build more refineries", and HORRORS!!! "We can't build more nuclear power plants"?
The Dems are the party not of change, but of "can't".
If all this is being directed against MCCain/Palin, I could have sworn that I heard
McCain say we need to use wind, solar, natural gas and more drilling. What did I miss here?
PS. Conservatives are pessimistic? Who is it that said, "we can't win, lets quit", "more drilling won't help" "It'll be 10 years before we get any benefit from more drilling" (I question that time span). Who says "we can't build more refineries", and HORRORS!!! "We can't build more nuclear power plants"?
The Dems are the party not of change, but of "can't".
First, I have to say that I only speak for myself, here, not for democrats even though I vote that way for a host of other issues-- just the notion that you can only be two ways in this country seems absolutely absurd to me. There are so many shades of gray here that it isn't fair to speak for 50% of the country. You know?
As for your remarks...
I like how you conveniently ordered your energy list: Wind, Solar, natural gas and oh yes more drilling. Ha! I watched the republican convention-- There were crazy people in the audience shaking Drill baby Drill signs. And then they started chanting Drill Drill Drill like some sort of strange cultist energy camp. I don't know about you but these people are freaking me out.
Nuclear power? Do you know anything about three mile island? How about Chernobyl? Do you want someone putting the radioactive waste in your back yard? Talk to me about it when you do. Oh yeah, but it won't be in your back yard it'll be in some impoverished person's backyard where you'll never have to think about it or know about it.. sort of like those giant landfills.
I think the real difference between people for drilling and myself and again I am speaking for myself only, not for democrats--is that while most of the people at the republican convention are still having a torrid love affair with the automobile, the passion in that relationship died out for me a long time ago. I would personally like to see a cultural shift away from automobiles. They are a blight on the landscape and are at the bottom of so many social problems from pollution to the biggest killer of wildlife and human teen-agers, to the ever-expanding American behind. Their parking lots leech up miles and miles of land. They invoke rage like no other between strangers (but now we can add politics to that list, probably) More time is wasted in automobiles commuting as people keep buying cheap land out in the country to build their dream house and then driving 40 miles to work. Sprawl follows their interstates and now when the baby boomers hit that 80 year mark that will add a whole new dynamic to road rage we've probably never seen before. There has been talk of raising the driving age to 18 which means teen-agers will be stuck without transportation unless we give them other options. We could easily start to make cultural shifts that would make sharing the roads with bikes, pedestrians, scooters, atv's, smart cars, golf carts or whatever you want, safer.
I am in No Way saying that we can ever get completely away from the car and there will always be a need for them, but can we significantly reduce their numbers or make it easier for people to live without them? Yes we can.
I'm tired of people having absolutely no vision when it comes to a safer, cleaner U.S. with less cars. There are plenty of financial incentives that could be created to reward people who opt to open businesses or live nearer the city centers that would make mass transit more feasible.
Look at cars:
increases in efficiency as well as power [ turbos, superchargers, 4 valves per cylinder, better tires, better aerodynamics, 5-6-7 speed even cv transmissions, ] all these came by market demand, not by government mandate.
If wind , solar, biofuels are truly the answer, why does the government have to fund it? or give oil companies tax breaks and subsidies for that matter?
Linear Mode
