Drill Here, Drill Now

Share

The day Newt Gingrich posted his petition on his website, I signed up, adjuring our elected officials to pursue an energy policy that will provide energy in the most efficient and expeditious manner possible TODAY. We have a need for more energy in order to be independent, not just from fossil fuels, but from every source monetarily feasible. I present here a summation of my own cost-benefit analysis consistent with my current beliefs on policy which I believe both practical and practicable towards energy independence and maintenance of our liberty at large.

Duplicity

Honorable Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) intends to oppose the President’s call for restoration of drilling offshore despite increased needs for energy at home. During every summer I lived in Reno, the magistrates asked US to conserve so as to leave more energy available for the Californians, whose energy draw produced massive blackouts in the heat of the summer. Every night, Lake Meade, the major watershed for Las Vegas and Los Angeles, drains six inches to generate enough power to run the Strip. At 100 feet below its historical high, the time upon which we may depend on Hoover Dam for electricity will be shorter than we think, since Lake Meade is projected to go dry by 2021.

The senator encourages people to use alternative transportation. Apparently he has never stood outside in Las Vegas in the heat of the summer waiting for a bus or ridden his bicycle during the day across blacktop in traffic. He wants us to turn down our air conditioning. I doubt he does in kind, nor would anyone expect him to in his aged state.

Feasibility

Although Nellis AFB recently installed large acreage in solar cells, large-scale solar projects, though appealing in Nevada, are not feasible. Environmental advocates encourage wind and solar power and preach it as a panacea given the large tracts of land available in Nevada for such a project. However, the extreme cost of such an installation (wind generators starting near $13000) precludes this eventuality from the pocketbooks of most Americans. Furthermore, it’s not feasible for everyone to use alternative energy, since most states lack the large tracts of empty land necessary for such an endeavor or lack sufficient wind strength or solar days to generate sufficient power.

Pollution

On the total pollutive potential of renewable energy sources, most people have been trained to see only a small portion of the entire vista view. While a solar cell or wind turbine in operation may generate little pollution, during the time of manufacture, transportation, installation, and maintenance, FOSSIL FUELS ARE BURNED, making them much more pollutive than advocates admit. Furthermore, we cannot discount the “pollution” created to the scenery by large turbines, reflecting panels, and the heat that must be dissipated. These installations perturb the natural ebb and flow of the atmosphere and local flora and fauna, and will have similar effects on native species to that of the Alaskan Oil Pipeline, of which many complaints were made. Wherever humans go, they stir things up that can never go back the way they were. Thermal and visual pollution are just as “bad” as smog or noise, yet you don’t hear anyone make a squabble about them.

Practicability

In selection of an energy solution, we need to focus on maximizing our utils. It would be irresponsible of us not to make proper use of the means which the God of Nature provided us. Oil and coal have no other useful function except to isolate the strata of earth from one another between which they find themselves wedged. Any commercial venture, including those on the continental shelf where politicians say oil companies should be drilling, operates on a return basis. Like when we go shopping, they focus on getting bang for their buck. Huge investments are required in drilling, mining, shipping, and processing.

Some readers may assume I do not want renewable energy. I do. I simply recognize that a DC-10 or an M1-Abrams will NOT RUN ON SOLAR OR WIND ENERGY. How will millions of acres of solar panels, wind turbines, and corn fields create jobs, provide the same amount of energy per util, or bring down the cost of energy when they are not the most expedient or efficient way to produce those items?

Basic economics teaches us to maximize our utils- do something with the greatest yield after a cost benefit analysis. The only cost-benefit category at which the liberals want to look is how our energy policy interacts with the environment. They value the blue-breasted finch’s livelihood over that of the Homo sapien. They know exactly what they’re doing- they want us to regress into the dark ages. The only things leftists produce are poverty and misery.

We should use everything we have where it is most practical to be done. Dig up the oil and coal we have, capture the sun and wind where we can, build nuclear power plants and develop other technologies. For all its doom, nuclear power produces little waste per capita, it’s just very persistent waste. For the moment, we need energy sources that contain enough potential energy per capita to run the engines of freedom. Drill here, drill now, pay less. If we don’t we’ll regret it. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and for the rest of our lives.

And our children will hold us justly indemnified for our irresponsibility pertaining to them.