I want you to consider the amount of damage that has been perpetrated in the name of environmentalism. Thanks to the China Syndrome, we stopped building nuclear power plants. And the last ones built were so challenged in the courts that their costs were three times the original plan. Thanks to other environmental programs, we can't drill off of the coasts of Florida-where one of the potentially richest oil fields is currently being illegally tapped by Cuba. We can't drill in ANWR in Alaska for fear of a dwindling caribou population. We are pushed by a Congress with eyes on rural votes to have corn ethanol in our fuel. We haven't built a refinery in 29 years. We can't use coal because of acid rain. So what are we to do?
The Ivory Tower advocates for clean air like to point to things such as hybrid cars, expensive fixes for homes and ethanol from corn-which not only reduced fuel efficiency but causes the price of gas at the pump to spike due to the necessary purging of fuel lines in order to have it added. The same people who so elegantly point to rows of cars don't stop to consider that average people cannot afford these things. And with the rising cost of fuel, everything is going to rise in cost from food to energy. It's funny how the same folks who push these ideas don't understand that those of us who work for a living can't just trash our old clunkers and spend $400 a month paying for a new car. And what's worse, they don't really seem to care.
There is the laissez-faire attitude that we "little people" can simply walk to work or turn off the air conditioning. What about the elderly, the infirm or the very young? I guess it's easy to do without air conditioning when you live in a climate were it's only needed a few weeks per year, but what are you going to tell folks in Houston, Dallas, Flagstaff, New Orleans, Phoenix or El Paso? Should we simply close shop and leave town from May until September? Should we wander around like previous generations of the Dust Bowl era?
And it goes farther than that. There's no question that the war in the Middle East has to do with national security in as much as oil is necessary to our livelihood. With Saddam in power and exercising control of the region, we would have been his virtual economic slaves. Right now, environmentalist are limiting our abilities to produce domestic fuel in so many ways, and yet they refuse to realize that these goals have forced our hand internationally. Oil is reaching record purchasing amounts, and the government makes money off of every gallon. We have reserves, we have potential sites for exploration and drilling, but the same folks who seem to be blind to the needs of everyday people are keeping us from progressing. It's the same attitude that helped Marie Antoinette lose her head. At estimated costs to the consumer of $4.00 a gallon coming soon to a neighborhood near you, isn't it time for us to stop this wasteful navel gazing nonsense and begin to use what resources we have available to tide us through until the next great wave of transportation technology comes along? Most midwives and obstetricians will tell you that an induced birth is more painful for the mother and the child. What organized environmentalism is doing to our nation now is the energy equivalent of a pitocin drip. So for the last time, NOW CAN WE DRILL?
9 comments:
And to add to your well worded rant, in 2007, 588,000,000,000,000 (yes, trillion!) gallons of water irrigated Nebraska corn. That's half the volume of Lake Michigan. Nebraska currently has 20 ethanol plants and uses nearly 500 million bushels of corn to produce over 1.3 billion gallons of ethanol. You hear a lot about how much energy is needed to produce a gallon of ethanol, but I'm not sure anyone has ever discussed the amount of water used to grow corn to make ethanol.
Unbelievable. Absolutely hidden in the media. I would love to know your sources.
The plant #, bushels, gallons came from the Nebraska Ethanol Board website http://www.ne-ethanol.org/industry/ethplants.htm
The water use came from a friend who works at the Natural Resource District office here in town.
I posted this on another blog and the usual suspects creep out with diversions and misdirection. The problem with ethanol is that the premise was based on Brazil's experience with sugar cane based ethanol, which is far more efficient. Corn based reduces fuel efficiency plus the cost rises when lines have to be purged to add the stuff to regular gas mixtures. It's insane! I have even heard that just making the ethanol burns more power than it adds to the system. The only thing I can figure is someone really wants votes from the midwest.
At this point it does take more energy to make than ethanol produces. Add to that the water consumption and the fact that the ethanol has to be trucked to the gas refineries to be blended in and we lose more than we save. I keep hearing that the power to make it will go down as the industry matures, but I remember ethanol being discussed 10 years ago, it's not exactly the new kid on the block.
I'm not sure if it someone wanting votes from the midwest as much as it's "look we're trying to become less oil dependent". From the hybrid cars that have batteries which when made have toxic byproducts to mercury filled "Green" lightbulbs to loss of water and food because of ethanol you have to wonder if we're doing more harm than good right now.
Also I'd like to know what other blog you posted on. I'd like to see what all was said.
http://community.myfoxdfw.com/blogs/TexasTruBlu
If you want, I would be happy to link back to wherever you originally posted this information.
Actually, the only place I've ever posted it is on your blog.
Try out your nearest MyFox website. I post on several, but my home base is Dallas. The New York site is pretty dead, but the LA site is pretty busy. Quite often, the webmasters for other Fox affiliates will pick up posts from the local websites and post them on others that are far afield.
Post a Comment