Comments on: Bold energy plans.

by: Ron Bengtson

Fri, 01 Oct 2004 22:03:51 +0000

Great article, but you should not have rolled over because of the criticism by Ronald Tobey.

The American Energy Independence web site provides several examples showing that the U.S can be 100% free of dependence on foreign oil within ten years using existing technology.

See Renewable Gasoline:
www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com/gasoline.html

Biodiesel:
www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com/biodiesel.html

Clean Hydrocarbons:
www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com/cleanhydrocarbons.html

Sugar:
www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com/sugar.html

And many more:
www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com

by: Tom Grey

Fri, 03 Sep 2004 21:38:06 +0000

I agree with the desire to reduce oil dependency — increase gas taxes.

But significant terrorism will cease as the Middle East becomes democratic — a World Without Dictators.

by: Andrew Hagen

Thu, 19 Aug 2004 14:18:19 +0000

All excellent points. While I had earlier stated that “energy independence” was laudable as a goal though not truly achievable, I should have put it in quotation marks in this post.

Pursuing “energy independence” in reality is pursuing the reduction of our dependence on foreign oil imports.

We can’t be free of oil in any conceivable near-term future, but we can be less dependent on it. A reduction in our foreign oil dependence would translate into less leverage against us held by Saudi Arabia and other oil powers. I believe that a reduction in their leverage against us will be critical to the war effort. I can’t agree with you that pursuing “energy independence” is just eco-leftist politics. It’s just common sense.

by: Ronald Tobey

Thu, 19 Aug 2004 01:47:13 +0000

The notion of that US energy independence would somehow free the US from terrorist strikes, or enable us to fight terrorism with less vulnerability, is nonsense. All the major allies of the US remain dependent upon Middle Eastern oil and oil imports from other places - Europe, Japan, and Korea. We cannot somehow abandon Sauda Arabia and other Middle Eastern oil exporting states, to terrorism for the sake of our allies. Do you want Europe and Japan to be denied Middle Eastern oil? Do we want friendly states to collapse because we don’t trade with them and don’t invest in them? What would happen to Sauda Arabia if it had no income? Do you want the wealth of Saudia Arabia to fall into the hands of Al-Qaeda, which would use it to finance the overthrow of Pakistan and thereby put a nuclear weapon into their hands? China, an enormous trading partner of the US, requires huge and growing oil imports. Do we want China’s economic expansion to grind to a halt? All these countries have vast interest in the Near East. Their interests require us - that is, the US - to maintain the ability to project force into the Middle East. Aside from oil, Israel is an important ally of the US. Our support for Israel will also require is to project force in the Middle East. Because we need to remain in the Middle East and to project force in the region to defend our interests, we will remain a target of terrorism, regardless of whether we import any Middle Eastern oil? “Energy independence” is as much a folly as autarky. John Kerry knows this. His advisors know this. They are mounting a false position, calling for “independence” of Middle Eastern oil simply because they want the eco-left vote. Kerry is being irresponsible.