There is certainly value in the United States being able to produce its own energy and ending its dependence on foreign oil. While we should certainly pursue alternatives to oil, viable alternatives that even the poor can afford are a long way off. This would be a reasonable interim solution.

__________________
A panda walks into a cafe. He orders a sandwich, eats it, then draws a gun and fires two shots in the air.

"Why?" asks the confused waiter, as the panda makes toward the exit. The panda produces a badly punctuated wildlife manual and tosses it over his shoulder.

"I'm a panda," he says at the door. "Look it up."

The waiter turns to the relevant entry and, sure enough, finds an explanation.

"Panda. Large black-and-white bear-like mammal, native to China. Eats, shoots and leaves."

At worse that would mean charging up by a coal plant. Are you telling me you have issues with coal?

With traditional battery plug in with no gas hybrid, it is an equivalent of 70 cents per gallon. These are the new batteries, so it is less. The charge quicker and last longer.

In the meantime, people that have issue with coal and go nanotech solar that works on cloudy or sunny days.

__________________
National Debt =

Okay, we have the amount of ANWAR, that is one part of it. But what about coastal, the North Dokota stuff that they are starting and the stuff that they found in the rocky mountains and all that.

What I'm wondering is, is it all really enough to actually make us independent of foriegn oil, actually based on the numbers?

__________________
Set your destination with your heart, get there with your mind.

"The wisest men follow their own direction." - Euripides

I think you're misunderstanding what I am saying. I am not saying they are stupid and aren't going to profit from drilling there. I never said it won't be profitable. In fact, I said it would be: almost a decade from now. Moreover, when it IS profitable, it will produce very little impact on the cost of fuel.

They will still make money at that point. Their crusade to drill there has nothing to do with providing cheap, abundant fuel for you. It won't. They want to drill there because that will make them some money regardless eventually. What's foolish isn't THEIR behaviour, but the media's and the public's, as they believe it will actually make a appreciable difference.

Your greed factor doesn't contradict the study I mentioned. It's not mutually exclusive. An operation can be profitable for the company, yet still not drop the price for the consumer appreciably because of low quality raw materials, difficulty to access, and slow flow.


On a site note, though, that a business is greedy doesn't mean it will be intelligent in its investments and behaviours. The bank crisis pretty much nails that one.

__________________

All our domestic capabilities will never make us independent of foreign oil. It's not practical or economical. A lot of the coal is either expensive to get at or lower quality--the same for a lot of the oil shales-type fuels. The oil we have access too plausibly also wouldn't suffice to make us independent, much less provide "cheap" petroleum. There's a reason why we import so much. It's not because we just don't feel like it. The United States used to be a net exporter of fuel. The system peaked and then went down. Even if we drilled ANWR and the coasts, it still wouldn't provide a stable alternative to importation. At best, it would be a very limited, temporary band-aid.

It's not just about how much is there--reserves--but how expensive they are to access and process as well as flow capacity. We have a lot of abundant resources, but many have already been used and what's left are far more expensive, lower quality versions or sources that will cause devastating pollution and thus externalities (costs) not factored into the retail price. So when people talk about reserves on TV, it's really quite deceptive.

__________________

I think the cheap, easy to get oil and refine oil on this continent is gone. If we are going to go after harder to get oil, I would focus on the gargantuan new oil field found off the coast of Brazil. Chevron is currently developing the deep water drilling technology to do that. Once online that will be the largest oil field in the world.

__________________
National Debt =

Personally I think coal is the least desirable because of the effects of mining. But no, I don't have a problem with any marketable energy source. What I have a problem with is people not being upfront about the particular source that they are promoting. Claiming a plug-in hybrid gets '220 mpg' is an example of that; so is claiming that "renewable" power can generate anything more than a small percentage of what we need is another; claiming that nuclear is not clean energy is yet another.

...and claiming that a hybrid gets 220 mpg.. but the company who manufactures the car must destroy the environment around the plant that makes the batteries for that car... defeats the purpose..

I am in agreement lets conserve up the ying yang but lets also pursue ALL options and to it efficiently and cleanly..

just because government is greedy and makes $0.40 windfall profit on every gallon sold, also doesn't make the government intelligent either.

If the adventure is NOT profitable, the oil companies lose.. not the government and not you. Therefore they are putting their money on the line not yours.

the high prices are due to speculation, and when the speculators find out that there will be more oil on the market in two or three years, their speculative bids will drop .... and drop fast.. because they are now betting on a low world supply.

Irrelevant to my point that the endeavour won't start producing profitably until roughly a decade from now. Moreover, and more importantly, it won't begin to maximize production until around then either. Maximum production is pittance as well. Understand? Good. Therefore, it's not the big solution you and the others paint it to be. ANWR can only produce roughly 800,000 bpd. That's nothing. And max production won't last long.

Incorrect. High prices are largely due to supply and demand as well as discontinuing profitability of current accessible reserves. The petroleum left is of decreasing quality, harder to get, thus more expensive to access. More people want fuel, which boosts the price around the world. Speculation is a minor player except for short-term spikes in prices. The long-term upward trend has little to do with it.

__________________