America’s dependence on foreign oil is a threat to our national security. I expect President Bush to illustrate this anew next Tuesday. We’re sending oil dollars to despots who hate us and want to destroy our way of life, to oil barons who provide funding and safe harbor to terrorists who plot ways to deliver on the despots’ goals.
This was recently confirmed by U.S. intelligence chief John Negroponte, our soon-to-be deputy secretary of State, in testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee. According to the story in the Los Angeles Times: “ ‘Iran’s influence is rising in ways that go beyond the menace of its nuclear program,’¯ said Negroponte, ticking off several developments that had emboldened the country in the last year. Among them, he said, was an increase in oil revenue that allowed greater funding of terrorist activities.”
Here at Terra Rossa we talk about the many reasons why a carbon market makes sense for America. It would promote investment in new low-carbon technologies right here in the U.S. It would encourage America’s entrepreneurs to develop new clean energy innovations that allow us to keep our competitive edge against other countries. It would provide new opportunities for America’s farmers to make money, whether through alternative fuels or carbon sequestration on their farmland. It would promote proper stewardship of creation by helping to reduce the consequences of climate change.
It would also reduce our dependence on foreign oil, which is contributing to the menace we face from terrorism today. As the hostile rhetoric against America from oil-producing nations such as Iran and Venezuela increases, so is the flow of U.S. dollars to them. Its time we start seriously considering a solution that addresses this national security threat while also meeting the other important goals of our nation - ample energy supplies, economic growth and stewardship of creation. It’s time we Red Staters get behind a market-based cap and trade system.
This entry was posted on Friday, January 19th, 2007 at 4:06 pm and is filed under Alternative Energy Technology, Cap and Trade, International Environmental News, National Security, Oil and Gas, Politics/Government . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 22nd, 2007 at 3:41 am
Anyone looking at the fiasco that carbon trading has already become in the EU won’t endorse it for America. Scam artists are getting fat, Germany is threatening legal action against the EU and China is laughing all the way to the bank with cash payments ostensibly earmarked for greenhouse gas reduction(Yeh, sure).
No thanks, Terra Rossa.
January 22nd, 2007 at 11:54 am
As a proud liberal, I just want to say that I’m happy to see a conservative blog endorsing true energy independence for this great country - in opposition to the massive subsidies to Big Oil that have heretofore prevailed.
Sure, we Americans may have our political differences on many issues - but there’s no reason why we shouldn’t be able to agree that the U.S. must provide for its own energy needs instead of being dependent on unstable dictatorial regimes overseas.
This is an issue that should transcend political ideology and party affiliation - just as liberal environmentalists should be able to join forces with conservative hunters and fishermen to protect this country’s great open spaces and wildlife.
To eliminate our dependence on foreign oil, there will be no “magic bullet,” no single answer. It will take a combination of measures: clean coal, biodiesel, wind, solar, electric cars, etcetera. Some will work better in one part of the country, some will work better in others. Perhaps it’s up to local and state governments to take the lead on this.
It is time for the U.S.A. to show the world once again that the tradition of Americn ingenuity can solve any technoligical problem. We are the country that put men on the moon: we should not sit back and wait for other countries to take the lead in energy technology.
For a long time, there has been too much political division and polarization in this country. While we don’t have to agree on everything, we should be able to respect each other’s viewpoints, discuss our differences without anger, and search for common ground.
Contrary to what some may claim, we liberals do not “hate America.” Why would I want to oppose my own country? That makes no sense: it would be like trying to cut my own throat. If I oppose the Bush administration, it just means that I believe this great country deserves a better president, that’s all. It’s just an opinion.
If I criticize the football coach, it doesn’t mean I’m not a loyal fan of my team. It just means I want to win.
Thank you for allowing me to contribute to this conservative forum, in the spirit of bipartisan free speech. For all its flaws, America still is the greatest country in the world.
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:02 am
Our country’s leaders need to have their backsides kicked over their heads. All this talk about the “new” fuel cell technology. I would be willing to bet that none of them studied the history of the fuel cell for if they did they would find that an operating model was built at the turn of the 20th century. And here we are one hundred years later just now realizing its potential.
All the hype at the Detroit Auto show about GM’s Volt that is no where near ready for production. All one has to do is to go to http://www.teslamotors.com and look at what this small company has done. The Tesla is so far ahead of GM it isn’t funny. A car that will go 250 miles on a single charge of its Lithium-Ion battery pack, a car with a top speed of 135 mph and an acceleration of 0 to 60 in 4 sec. Look at their website and realize just how far advanced this vehicle is.
The gov’t needs to give companies like this a big boost. No the vehicle won’t replace the gasoline powered vehicles for long distance driving, but NYC to Boston, Baltimore to D.C. or Philly to D.C. is a piece of cake for these cars.
Greater tax incentives and subsidies are needed to bring a car like this to the forefront.
January 23rd, 2007 at 10:41 am
People,
So far, these comments are overlooking a central point. To use energy, one must procure energy. In the real world, energy is always conserved; that is, energy is never lost or gained, only converted. Yes, battery cars run without producing pollution. But batteries themselves are produced from toxic substances by polluting processes. Batteries must be charged. How? By plugging them into a wall outlet connected to a power grid connected to a power plant burning coal, in most places.
If we wanted true energy independence, we would adopt household-sized nuclear reactors. These could be either closed-loop pressurized water reactors or simple thermopile systems. Buried 25 to 30 feet under a house, they would silently and with no pollution whatever produce all the power that house would need for 20 to 25 years, at which time, the utility would replace the fuel, and perform any needed maintenance. Each household would have a bank of batteries to store energy when it is not being used, and to provide for greater output when needed.
These reactors need nothing close to a critical mass to operate, so there is no danger of an explosion. Since they would be constant-output devices, there would be no need for the adjustable controls found on commercial reactors. Commercial reactors could eliminate out dependence on coal and hydroelectric power in a meer decade, if the environmentalists would let us build the facilities.
Fuel cells are fine, but hydrogen is not found free in nature. Hydrogen must be removed from its most common compound - water - through the application of electricity. Again, we are not creating energy; but converting the electric energy to chemical energy in the hydrogen, so that we can release almost that same energy in the fuel cell. Almost all the energy that goes into the fuel cell is released as useful energy, but half the energy that goes into the generation of the hydrogen is released there as oxygen. Unless we are able to find a market for the oxygen, it will be released into the atmosphere, which is good, because all that hydrogen is going to need that oxygen back in the fuel cell.
If we want to move us and a vehicle and product any distance, we require energy. It will have to come from someplace. Solar works when the sun is up. Wind works if you want to down wind. Wind is not a good energy source if you need to travel against it. Nuclear is still a bit bulky for cars, trucks, and trains. It works great for aircraft carriers and submarines, but those don’t fit in our garages.
If we want to, we can take many more conservation steps. We can cut auto emissions and particulates by synchronizing the traffic lights in our cities. We can cut auto emissions by shifting public transportation to the routes people are actually using, rather then taking everyone downtown first. We can cut truck emissions by rebuilding the railroads so they can actually carry the freight again. These and any other small steps each of us can take will help.
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:01 am
With the selling of our gold to China, with the selling of other precious metals to China, does anyone have a clue as to where it is going? Gold, into some government employee’s pocket and the rest? Try bullets, nuclear, etc. They continue to buy up our debt and one day, very soon THE SLEEPING GIANT awake and not only oil issues will be at stake, it will be our nation’s welfare at stake. There are enough people in China to make us look and fall like dominoes and one day, it will happen. We continue to act as if they are our best friend in the Asian countries. We export not only commodities out to them, they will or perhaps already are, purchasing our beef to “beef” up their physical health needs.
Does no one remember sending our salvage to Japan and what that gained us? Does anyone look around and look at the assets this once enemy has bought in the U.S.A.? How many realize that, like Japan, China will become a threat and they have just the right balance of many important things to do it. An aberrant thought perhaps, but what if…what if, China and Japan joined forces one day?
Perhaps, common sense has been buried. Perhaps it will be the oil industry, as a whole, that will threaten our future freedoms in America for the propaganda that surrounds Americans forms a filter that we can never, truly trust or know the exact positioning of.
January 23rd, 2007 at 11:21 am
AMERICA HAS BEEN LOST. MOST ARE UNAWARE.SOME HAVE A SMALL CLUE. THE PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON D.C. ARE WORKING FOR THEMSELVES. THEY HAVE MADE SLAVES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. AMERICA HAS ENOUGH OIL TO LAST 200 YEARS. YET THEY ENERGY COMPANYS DO BUSINESS OVER SEAS WHY. TO MAKE MONEY AND TO KEEP THE AMERICAN PEOPLE UNDER THEIR CONTROL. WONDER WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH THE BILLIONS THEY HAVE MADE? I HEAR THE LIES FROM THEM AND THE MEDIA AND THOSE PUPPETS IN WASHINGTON DC YET SEE NO ACTION OR ANYTHING THAT MAY LOOK LIKE ACTION. PEOPLE WHO MAKE MONEY OFF OF PEOPLE BY OVER CHARGING FOR ENERY SHOULD BE BRANDED FOR ALL TOO SEE. AS WELL AS THOSE WHO ARE THE PUPPETS OF THE ENERGY COMPANIES. BRAND THEM ALL. REMEMBER THOSE WHO ARE COLD BECAUSE THEY CAN NOT AFFORD TO HEAT THEIR HOMES AND EAT.
January 23rd, 2007 at 1:29 pm
I am in the oil business. In terms of oil, we will never, ever be self sufficient in this country again. Nuclear is the only form of energy that might get us close to being self sufficient, by freeing up a lot of oil and nat. gas currently used for electricity so that it can be used to power automobiles. We only produce about 5.5 Million barrels of oil a day domestically, but use the equivalent of nearly 20 Million barrels a day. Ethanol will not get us there. It takes more energy to make a gallon ethanol than the energy that gallon will produce when burned in your vehicle. AND, you get 25-30% less gas mileage burning ethanol. No, I am not joking. The use of ethanol in this country may make us slightly less dependent on foreign oil, but it is a BAD deal for the american taxpayer.
January 23rd, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Less Carbon=>More Security
How can less waste help us survive??? One issue that is brought to the attention of the world constantly!!!
However, no one feels the need to conserve. Most of all those individuals who do drain our natural resources with extravagant living styles. They feel, they have nothing to do with that issue. An article highlighting, recently, appeared of the so call Royal Family of England. Which said Prince Charles was going to N.Y.C.,U.S.A. to accept an award for his efforts to promote a better environment. And while there, would vacation with a skying trip. Sounds more like You conserve so that I, Prince Charles along with other Celebrities can do as we please!!! This persistent attitude has us as a civilization in a decline because of popularity. When there are better means to communicate and conserve. Who will really CARE about the future??? Less Carbon=>More Security
January 23rd, 2007 at 7:54 pm
The only approach to solving the country’s future energy problems and reducing its dependence upon foreign energy mineral supplies is for the present lame-brain Congress to re-enact the economic incentives enacted by forward thinking Congresses in the 1930’s responsible for building the oil, natural gas and coal industries that created the greatest economic machine the world has ever seen. The incentives provided imaginative individuals the opportunity to raise risk capital to drill rank wildcat wells resulting in discovering new oil and gas deposits and developingt coal deposits considered too small for the major coal companies.
By and large, the bottom-line oriented individuals running today’s energy producing mineral resource companies lack the backgrounds, field experience and common sense it takes to uncover previously unexplored energy mineral deposits and, for this reason, resort to “utility type”, i.e., coal seam,shale and tight sand gas drilling prospects as their attempt to solve the natural gas shortage problem. History has showed during the 1973-1985 energy crisis that such prospects conducted by similarly experienced individuals ended up costing lots of institutional type dollars and did little to add to domestic oil and gas productivity.
The inability of individuals with the knowledge and ability to find and exploit existing and, as yet unexplored, oil, gas and coal deposits to raise risk capital since 1985 when Congress rescinded the natural resource development economic incentives is the major reason the domestic energy producing mineral industries are in the terrible shape they’re in today. Loss of the risk capital needed by independent operators who historically drilled 70+% of all domestic wells and discovered the bulk of domestic oil and gas reserves has mainly been responsible for destroying the domestic energy mineral producing industries’ infrastructure consisting of well drilling and servicing companies, oilfield equipment and steel and polyvinyl fabricating operations and disbanding the teams of 1950’s and 1960’s trained and experienced field seismologists, geologists and petroleum engineers who located and developed today’s energy producing mineral deposits. In 1985, the country’s total daily oil production averaged 10.6MMBPD and for the previous five years the number of new field wildcat wells drilled averaged 7,300/year. Today, the country’s total daily oil production averages 7.5MMBPD and for the past five years the number of new field wildcat wells drilled averaged 1,460/year of which only 250 were oil prospects. Had the desperately needed risk capital been available to the domestic oil industry the past twenty years, its possible because the necessary oil reserves are in-place in existing fields, that current oil production would be flat or only slightly down from the 1985 figure providing 50% of current domestic oil consumption instead of 30%.
January 26th, 2007 at 7:00 pm
Roger Diament “For all its flaws, America still is the greatest country in the world. ”
Yeah and for all her flaws my wife is still the greatest wife in the world.
And even though they are stupid killers you support the troops.
I think liberals hate America because of what they say everyday of the week …
January 29th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
[...] Ok. Weā€™re all aware of the danger of being dependent on foreign oil from nations hostile to America (see my recent post here). Ā As an article in todayā€™s Wall Street Journal explains, denying our oil dollars to the worst of these ā€“ Iran and Venezuela ā€“ could actually reduce their influence abroad and at home: [...]
January 30th, 2007 at 12:51 am
We may already have the oil. In the 60’s I worked near the US Naval Petroleum Oil Reserve in Kern County California. A wild cat co. struck oil at a deeper depth than the old oil strata. Within a few weeks I could count 28 drilling rigs in operation. Wells were drilled adjacent to every “dry” hole out there and called “in” at the same depths as the dry holes. Seems everyone already knew the oil was there. In the 80″s, during the Carter debacle, there was extensive drilling in the “Over Thrust” belt, in Idaho, Wyoming and Montana. There was a rig drilling in the Caribou Mountains east of Idaho Falls. I was in a restaurant sitting next to four guys working that rig and they discussed when to call the well “in”. Two weeks later. the paper carried the sad story of “another dry hole”. How many more “dry holes” are out there? Don’t misunderstand, I’m all for alternative energy sources, they are a must, but let’s not cut off our proverbial nose to spite our face.
April 5th, 2007 at 3:56 am
Excuse, and what you think concerning forthcoming elections?
March 5th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
[...] of the danger of being dependent on foreign oil from nations hostile to America (see my recent post here). As an article in today’s Wall Street Journal explains, denying our oil dollars to the worst [...]