In 2005, the Bush White House was able to pass the Energy Policy Act of 2005 which subsidized the first nuclear reactors built in our country in decades. Funds were given for up to 6 reactors produced by private companies and one was to be produced by the Department of Energy. It also subsized energy companies to invest in alternative energy technology and exploration. A majority of the Democrats in both the House and Senate voted against this bill.
Of course, neither of these bill have solved the problems of America's future energy needs, and frankly, until our nation becomes willing to produce nuclear power stations and invest in technology to produce synthetic petroleum from this nuclear energy (scientists at Los Alamos labs estimate that it can be produced for about $4.78 per gallon as is now), we're going to have problems.
Thing is, our nation is sitting on an oil reserve bigger than Saudi Arabia's, but it's locked in the form of coal. If we advance liquid coal technology, we can escape from dependency on foreign oil. Problem being our nation's environmental laws prevent this from being developed.
Further, all attempts to push through nuclear power plants and oil refineries have been met with stiff resistance by Democrats and have not passed until 2005. Right now, Brazil is producing nuclear power plants many times more efficient than what we have here in the US, though our newest ones should be far better when they finally come into operation.
Congress has been doing our nation a great disservice for some 25-years. Until our politicians from both parties get serious about:
1) developing the natural resources we have
2) developiong nuclear energy (afterall, France gets 80% from nuclear)
we're going to be hurting in this country.
EDIT: And for all the complaining I hear about oil companies in this country, very few actually understand the situation. Exxon-Mobile, our nation's largest oil company, holds rights to 1.08% of the world's known oil reserves. The vast majority of the rest is held by state run socialist companies such as in Venezuela, Mexico, and Iran. Exxon is far more efficient than these companies and is but one reason oil costs less in the US than elsewhere. Yes, it's the most profitable corporation on earth, but its profit margin is only about 8%, which is less than the federal and state governments are getting from oil.Why doesn't the United States do a Mahatan Project to find ways to be free of foreigen dependence on oil?
The oil lobby has to much influence on the Congress and would never allow it to happen.
But in theory this would be a good idea. Except that the US does not have the oil capacity to support the nation's rate of consumption so there is really not a lot anyone could do but support green initiatives and try to cut back on consumption.
I would think imposing legislation that would put minimum limits on car's gas efficiency would be in order. Say for instance the least mpg's a car should get should be 25 miles a gallon. This combined with lowering the national speed limit to 55 would cut back on oil consumption.
And like Obama said, we should investigate whether these oil companies are engaging in price gouging and if they are we should impose fines or sanctions against them. We must uncover their unprofessional predatory tactics against the American people.
But in reality, other countries are paying the equivalent of $6-7 per gallon so why are Americans complaining?
And we should not rely so heavily on OPEC (or at least plan not to in the coming years).
We need to invest in green initiatives, solar power, hydrogen power, electric powered vehicles and end this dependency on foreign oil.
But will the oil lobby allow it?Why doesn't the United States do a Mahatan Project to find ways to be free of foreigen dependence on oil?
What - are you crazy? Bush's friends are making so much money on oil. We aren't going to spoil a good thing like that!
Do Not Vote Republican Anymore!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment