English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

We have an enormous trade defecit, primarily fueled by our automobiles.
We are fighting terrorists funded with oil money.
We cannot locally drill our way to energy independence.
Our military is fighting in a nation no one would care about if not for the oil underneath it.
We know independence is possible (just look at the transformation in Brazil over the last decade)


So, why aren't we making any true national effort to become energy independent?

2006-12-18 04:37:00 · 10 answers · asked by Steve 6 in Politics & Government Politics

10 answers

Steve,

You ask a superb question; and you're probably going to get a lot of conspiracy answers. The truth is, there's a simpler, but altogether unsatisfying answer: The electoral cycle.

If you want to be energy self-sufficient you can be (first off -- I'm sorry, but you're wrong about Brazil -- they're hugely dependent on imported oil -- and their gasohol program actually consumes more oil than it replaces. The program is a politically correct joke).

There are possible alternatives, the most promising of which is hydrogen. But there are monumental problems with it; and to work out these problems is both costly and time consuming. Here's where the electoral cycle comes in to play.

Politicians are elected to office, and they are given a very, very short window of opportunity to produce results. People want to see progress, and they want it now. This is why politicians tend to vote for dramtic programs that have immediate payoffs. They need to show something to the voter/taxpayers who ask, "What did you do for me lately?"

So long term, costly things like social security, education reform, infrastructure, and (yes) alternative energies, get pushed aside in favor of immediate problems with immediate solutions and immediate political benefits.

I return to my original statement -- do you want to be energy self-sufficient? You can be, if you're willing to spend hundreds of billions of dollars, and wait for maybe 15-20 years (or more) for workable solutions to be found. You and I both might argue that that's money and time well spent. But you and I aren't running for re-election in two year's time -- members of Congress are.

And that's your answer. It's not a conspiracy. It's not that Bush is in the hands of the oil companies. It's that politicians of both parties would rather spend tax dollars on other things that have immediate political payoff. We can change that, if WE THE PEOPLE get serious and demand action, and let politicians know that unless they make this a priority the WE will make finding a replacement for them OUR priority. But until the general public takes this more seriously than they're currently willing to do. I'm afraid it's business as usual.

Hope this answer helps. Cheers, mate.

2006-12-18 04:55:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

The oil industry donates too much money to the political campaigns.

They also have one of the biggest lobbying efforts going in Washington.

Brazil is basing their Ethanol production off of sugar cane which is a more efficient source than corn.

I'm not sure that sugar cane would grow well in our farm belt states but I certainly agree with you in principle.

I wouldn't oppose redirecting the money we put into our space program into energy research until we can produce enough energy for our own needs.

2006-12-18 04:52:21 · answer #2 · answered by aiguyaiguy 4 · 1 0

I live in Palo Alto CA, and here thirty percent of our energy is from alternitive sources, alot from solar and wind power. This is because the people themselves have demanded a change. If every city in the US did this and also if more people drove hybrids things would get better. The people have to demand change before it will come.

2006-12-18 04:42:12 · answer #3 · answered by Lachelle 3 · 2 1

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
THE END
Btw I care about Iraq with or without oil......Civil war is a good thing if one side or the other is fighting for their freedom!
Maybe we should destabilize a few more countries that oppress their own people and at least give the freedom loving a chance.
After all the more Democracies there are around the world there are the safer my civil rights are here in America.

2006-12-18 04:38:55 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

We only do so sporadically, when oil prices spike. It's a total waste of resources, because we lose interest when prices drop. Americans are just very impatient people. Sometimes that's to our benefit, other times it is to our detriment.

2006-12-18 04:40:29 · answer #5 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 2 1

because the citizens haven't rallied together to put pressure on the government to change things. We are too busy in our daily lives to try to do something about it. Write your local govenrment agency. Take action.

2006-12-18 04:40:19 · answer #6 · answered by Jimena S 3 · 1 1

easy answer
Quit depending on the gov to solve all your problems
WACO environmentalist gum up the works with law suits and nothing can get done the elitist only hate America want to F-up everything

2006-12-18 04:43:49 · answer #7 · answered by Deport all ILLEGAL Alien INVADER 3 · 0 1

Because our president has buddies in the oil business - he's just looking after his friend's business interests!

2006-12-18 04:44:20 · answer #8 · answered by panda_glam 2 · 1 1

Randy C said it best. It's all about money. And power. That's why we're in Iraq.

2006-12-18 04:41:59 · answer #9 · answered by Vinegar Taster 7 · 1 2

They won't make money if they do that.

2006-12-18 04:39:51 · answer #10 · answered by talarlo 3 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers