PeteEU

I agree that more supply will keep us going till alternatives become practical.. however alternatives will not become practical in the present political environment in the US as there is no incentive to provide alternatives. Look at the whole off shore oil drilling debate, and how twisted it has become, totally lacking facts.

That's why a shock like this is good, not only for the free market to finally get its act together, but also the corrupt politicians world wide that promote the agenda of the oil companies and oil consuming companies ahead of alternative energy systems.

I have seen all this before. In Europe we had a very rude shock in the 1970s and early 1980s. This rude shock, car free Sundays and so on, forced a new type of politician to emerge. Sure they are still some what in the "pocket" of big business, but they are far far far more independent, as in going against big business than they were before the oil crisis. May it be emission standards for industry, pollution standards or fuel efficiency for cars and trucks, to promoting public transport across the continent. Note, the French public high speed train company posted over 1 billion euros in profits for the last year.. so yes public transport can be profitable if done right.

This has meant that the oil surge of today has not had the same impact on European's as its had on Americans and Europe leads the world in alternative energy (non oil/coal) technology.

That's why the vision of a "moon shot" on US energy, from whoever, is a good one as it has many more benefits for the US and the world than staying the present course. The only ones it will hurt are the big oil companies and the companies refusing to accept the facts.. aka GM and Ford... and of course oil producing nations. But even they are thinking beyond oil, and investing heavily in non oil industries and alternative energy as they know that oil will run out.. so why is the US so stubborn and sticking to oil!?

__________________
PeteEU

UtahBill

I don't think of it that way....
Price of oil, or what we pay for gas at the pump, is not the only issue. We should be thinking of cost, not price alone.

Energy independence is much more important.
We can get closer to that, by conserving, drilling, and use of existing alternatives. The 3 prong approach will do the trick a lot faster than some think. Certainly pinning our hopes on scientists coming up with a magic pill will NOT do the trick.....
Commuter cars in congested areas are here, and will increase in use. That will help conserve, but we will always need oil even if all our cars become electric.
Drilling, preferably on land first, is essential to reduce the amount of oil we are buying from our enemies, the arabs.

__________________
The Age of Reason doesn't have to be a thing of the past.
Being judgemental is the prime directive of some evangelicals.
No success can compensate for failure in the home.

UtahBill

Why are we sticking to oil? The people demand it, and our politicians are a bunch of spineless worms who say what we want to hear instead of exposing us to the realities of the situation.
We have no leadership.....

Kandahar

I think a 10% increase in the global supply would be significant, although I don't think even that would reduce the cost of oil (because demand will probably increase even more than that, in the time it takes to set up shop). That doesn't mean we can't do other smaller things too, but it does mean that people should not look at something small and claim that it's the solution to our energy problems.

I have never said that we can't drill in ANWR or that we can't drill offshore. I just wish that we could just do it without people using it as an excuse to avoid having an actual energy policy.

__________________
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams