Armageddon wrote:Energy independence by the US? LOL, thats funny. 20MBPD? Good luck with that
I didn't say it would be fast or easy. But it sure as hell seems a lot smarter than burning all we can possibly afford with abandon, and doing almost nothing (as far as official strategic policy) about preparing for when it's much more expensive. Oh, and meanwhile spending $trillions on various military equipment and misadventures "protecting our interests" in oil.
In my world, where I exited college in '81 having recently witnessed the third large spike in prices in a single decade, it seemed to me that this was getting to be enough of a "thing" and a threat, that we ought to start doing something about it.
The obvious solution was to start gradually taxing it, and encouraging the natural economic reaction to conserve and seek alternatives which would ensue. Given that we had time back then nothing radical or fast was needed -- just persistent and determined.
A quarter or so for a gallon of gasoline or diesel to wake people up, and then adding a dime a year EVERY YEAR for a couple/few decades, IMO, would have produced a very different set of decisions as far as behavior for both US citizens and government.
But that kind of thing doesn't happen in the US because someone might not be re-elected in the short term, and the masses are largely incapable of mid-term thinking, much less strategic thinking. So there's that.
That was until global warming became so obvious. Since then I just want a $20 or so tax per gallon on gasoline on fossil fuel equivalents (to try and pay for all the social costs, more or less) -- but this tends to just get almost everyone upset.
So we'll just continue on as is, apparently. And then when bad things happen, as they surely will, it will, of course, be everyone ELSE's fault.
https://www.macrotrends.net/1369/crude- ... tory-chart