You are barking up the wrong tree.
We need to lessen our dependence on foreign oil by switching from oil to other sources.
There are many ways to reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Drive more efficient vehicles. Drive the vehicles you have more efficiently. Those two
factors can make the biggest difference. If everyone increased their current cars efficiency by 50%, that would impact our consumption immensely. If
we bought cars that doubled to tripled our mileage, it would help even more. I can drive a 26 mpg car and get near 50 mpg out of it. I switched to a
50 mpg car and can get 60+ out of it. Consuming less is how we reduce our dependence before new infrastructure is in place.
Using bio-fuels, like bio-diesel ... if all diesels switched to a non dino-sourced fuels, it would save a lot.
In 2005, we vehicle consumption estimated 138,723,000,000 gallons of gasoline and 43,042,000,000 gallons of diesel in the U.S. 421,000,000 gallons of
all other fuels combined (E85, CNG, etc.) Source: Download XLS -
www.eia.doe.gov Estimated Consumption of Vehicle Fuels in the United States, by Fuel Type, 2003-2005
Think about it. If we reduced passenger vehicle consumption by half, that would save 69 billion gallons of gasoline. Don't know what true
percentage of the diesel is biodiesel in that estimate ... it is not separate, but we can assume the share is on the low side, increasing it to 100%
bio-diesel should be our goal.
A barrel of oil is 42 gallons of crude. A barrel gets us 19.5 gallons of 87 octane. So reducing our consumption of gas by half would reduce our need
of 3.5 billion barrels of crude yearly. (This barrel also produces about 7 gallons of diesel.)
Ethanol helps as well, now take that remaining 70 billion gallons and make 85% of it ethanol (not a permanent solution, but temporary fix). Now we
are down to only needing 10.5 billion gallons of gasoline a year, or 538 million barrels of crude a year (which also from the process nets us 3.77
billion gallons of diesel).
Our national security and independence could be seen in a short time through the use of 'green' technology, without off-shore drilling. And while
we do that, the world supply lasts longer while we solve the problem of developing a new fuel that works, is clean, and renewable. Remember, until we
master synthetic production of all products, we still need fossil fuels for making plastics and other daily objects we don't think about the source
Now, I am all for not burning coal and other fossil fuels for home energy as well. Whether it be nuclear, wind, solar, water, etc. power sources.
# Date-Time Sunday, September 10, 2006 at 14:56:07 (UTC) ... Depth 10 km (6.2 miles) set by location program ...
This is the largest of more than a dozen shocks that have been instrumentally recorded from the eastern Gulf of Mexico in the past three
decades, and it is the most widely felt. The most recent significant earthquake in the region occurred on February 10th, 2006 and had a magnitude
of 5.2. We have not associated this earthquake with a specific causative fault.
Drilling for natural gas and oil has been occurring in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico offshore Alabama and Florida for more than three
In the 70s we had a military ship that could drill nearly 6 miles down - 30,000 ft drilling depth
, max water depth 10,000 ft.
Drilling ship owned by U.S. Navy, used by CIA, first time 'neiter confirm nor deny'
used with a FOIA request
Off-shore drilling can cause serious problems. Like Earthquakes. Pump enough out and let the Gulf of Mexico be more prone to shift ... just so a
few morons can fill up their SUVs.
So, even though it is not attributed to drilling
, it shows instability in the area, even if it is long term plate techtonics. Sort of how a
window is strong, but crack it and it shatters. Do we really want to mess with it, since there is no guarantee that it won't have a negative effect,
and it is for something that we can do without if the same money is invested in renewable energy instead of depleting energy, with a better net effect
on national security and national independence?
So, it is not just environmentalists teaming up with big oil ... or anything else like that.
Disagreeing with offshore drilling does not make one an environmental whacko.
What it really comes to, there is more than one solution to every problem.
How about a bit more respect and understanding to those who you don't agree with, and try doing some research to understand them, even if you will
Slandering, profiling, labeling a group because they don't fit into what you believe in, or don't agree with the only solution you think exists does
not show very well on the people who conduct such actions.
We should all try to actively deny ignorance, and try to show humility and respect towards all people. In fact, my Constitution has those very words,
'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal' ... not just ones we agree with.