The term “fossil fuel” has become a dirty word when discussing energy policy. Not only are they responsible for draining our pocketbooks at the pump, they also destroy the environment and may or may not fund terrorism. Outrageous!
The unfortunate truth, however, is that for the foreseeable future our economy will continue to run on fossil fuels, primarily oil. Thus we need a short-term (fossil fuel) and long-term (green technology) energy strategy garnered toward delivering a cheap, reliable, domestically produced supply of energy.
The proportion of our economy that is fueled by oil and the economic turmoil caused by rising oil prices makes oil the obvious starting point. T. Boone Pickens is right, this is a problem we can’t drill our way out of. Drilling is, however, the first step. The United States possesses enormous untapped oil fields, and should we tap into those reserves we’d see a significant drop in oil prices.
Of course, the objection is “We won’t see a drop of oil for seven years,” one of the most irritating, namby-pamby excuses around. Had we drilled when such an objection was raised 15 or 20 years ago we’d be reaping the benefits of cheaper prices now.
But to stick to the present, we should see progress much sooner than 7 years from now. First, that untouched oil represents billions of dollars for oil companies, and you have to believe that they’re going to find a way to extract it as quickly as possible. Second, the knowledge of a large, reliable supply of oil on it’s way to the market should help to ease speculator fears and lower prices.
The second fossil fuel to consider is natural gas. Similar to oil, there are massive reserves of natural gas in the US, but what many people don’t know is that natural gas can and has been used to power automobiles.
Finally, one of the most promising options available is coal gasification, which can convert coal into natural gas, diesel, or gasoline. Coal gasification is nothing new, having been used successfully by countries unable to gain access to foreign energy, like Germany in WWII and South Africa during apartheid.
Gasification plants have even been built periodically in the US, but due to the low price of oil, never gained serious consideration. Our tremendous coal reserves, perhaps the largest on earth, make coal gasification a serious alternative for lowering energy prices.
The above options all have a common theme; they’re found right here in the United States of America. Not only will each lower energy prices, they’ll also bring good jobs to communities across the country. The extraction process will provide blue-collar jobs, and the maintenance of coal gasification plants will yield high-paying technical jobs. Until a viable alternative to oil can be found, natural gas and coal will help ease energy costs and move the US toward energy independence.
Chris recently graduated from Franklin & Marshall College in Lancaster, PA with a degree in Government. In the fall, he’ll be starting law school at Wake Forest University. You can read his previous entry of why he’s a conservative here.
Great article and review of the current fossil fuel situation. I disagree that we should tap into places such as ANWR just to make an attempt at lowering gas prices. ANWR is a place of natural beauty, and I believe it should stay that way. I feel that the United States continues to make excuses for our use of fossil fuels. Why is this? Because its easy? 86% of energy throughout the world is produced because of fossil fuels. While I have yet to see and significant advances towards our “Green Strategy”, some people continually push for drilling on American soil as if it would give us more time to discover alternatives. It seems to me that our focus is still on using fossil fuels. Instead of using our money, time, and effort on trying to find the next location for drilling, we need to look towards alternatives quickly. When we get to the point of where our fossil fuels are limited in number, what are we going to do? Our way of life as we know it would be ruined. All of our easy energy production would be decimated due to our low amounts of fossil fuels. There will come a time when we are no longer allowed to make excuses for our dependence on fossil fuels. ANWR will be there forever, but fossil fuels won’t always be available. We need to find alternatives quickly before it’s too late.
Great post, Chris!
To Cameron, I’d first ask have you ever seen a picture of ANWR’s beauty? Also, how would drilling for oil in a very tiny part of the area hurt it’s beauty?
I don’t think Chris is saying we should always rely on fossil fuel. He’s saying we need both a short term and long term plan. It’s going to take a long time for our entire infrastructure to switch off fossil fuels to renewable energy, and I think while we’re waiting (a lot of people are investing a lot of money in new technologies, by the way), we should be using the resources we have in our own country to keep prices down and help our economy.
I can’t say I have had the oppurtunity to witness the beauty of ANWR other than through a picture, but in my opinion drilling throughout tiny areas of the territory would hurt the landscape. But Nancy my argument is that everytime I turn on the news I get to see the “wonderful” competition between democrats and republicans on the issue of drilling in ANWR. Personally, I could care less about this issue. ANWR is nothing more than a tourist attraction, not a site for future oil drilling. OH! But wait! Shouldn’t our politicians try to compromise on certain issues that would affect our future energy crisis? No, instead we get the weekly dose of ANWR on the television set. I don’t see much of a future for America if our politicians are spending their time in an attempt to unlock the gates of ANWR. I rarely, if ever, see a segment about anything concerning our energy goals for the next few years. Sure, lets open up the United States oil fields, and while we are at it, maybe we can find another place of natural beauty that holds some oil and complain about not drilling there for the next 10 years. All while we sit around and blame eachother for ANWR being the reason we are in the stages of high gas prices in the first place. This complaining is wasting the amount of time we have to fix the energy mess. Nancy, we are addicted to oil, and it’s unfortunate, but true. Maybe you have seen some changes in the way we use energy over the past 5 years, but I have seen nothing. Change takes time, specifically in the area of energy use. But its hard to change American people who want to do things the easy way. Oil is easy, simple, and had become our precedent. Its now or never, and America is going to have to endure a huge change in the way we have been doing things. But as long as America doesn’t want to step away from oil, we are going no where.
By the way,
I support drilling in the United States as long as it doesn’t become our excuse. Not in ANWR though (Just my opinion though 
Cameron, Cameron. Did you know that this tired rant has been going on for over 30 years. It is ridiculous to me that the very thing that could give us an opportunity to advance our civilization towards alternative fuels is constantly shot down, thus prolonging our necessity of fossil fuels. If we would have started drilling over 30 years ago when we should have, we would have a 20 - 30 year head start on the world in producing alternative fuels.
Do you propose that we take all of our money that we’re spending on fossil fuels now and advert them completely towards new fuel types? First, if we do that will you promise to carry me to work. I really don’t have good shoes and couldn’t imagine walking that much. Secondly, Ummmm....there are billions each year being thrown at this. It will happen! Just the new batteries that have been recently invented are going to revolutionize energy consumption and use. But it takes time.
Using our own resources is a necessity. The very political nightmare that is created from our dependency on foreign oil prohibits us from being as aggressive as we can be in creating new fuels. And have you seen a picture of where their wanting to drill? Seriously? There are 19 million acres, just in ANWR, and they want 2,000. It is 2,000 acres of dirt and ice. Not so beautiful. I promise it won’t disturb much.
I guess though we can just sit back and let Japan do it all. Why should we want America to be on the forefront of things such as this? The Civic is a better car anyway, and now that they have a hydrogen model being produced we can speed the clock for the downfall of American Industries such as Ford and GM. But you know, that once was beautiful land. Detroit that is. I swear it was. Had to be! Before those industrialist that made us the greatest nation ever came in! They ruined a beautiful field to do what: revolutionize the world? Please. I know I could live without my car.? I would much rather be able to look at a field of grass.
Chris had a very valid point. And never once stated that we need to maintain a dependency on oil. That was just the liberal hate jargon you’ve been force fed by the media. If you re-read his post you might find out that he was saying we need to get away from oil, but to do so we need to use our resources now.
How about this? If we give you ANWR can we drill in Colorado?
Oh, and you’ve got to read this: http://blog.heritage.org/2008/06/29/the-truth-about-anwr/
It will really help you. I hope!
First. Lol. If you give me ANWR you can have Colorado. But that wasn’t really my point either… I stated that I am completely for drilling in the United States. And your argument that drilling 20-30 years ago has me sliding down your slippery slope. We obviously have no way of knowing what would have become of our energy crisis if we would have started drilling years earlier. In my opinion we would still be in the same boat we are now. Addicted to oil, and with a smaller percentage of fossil fuels then what we started with. And the “liberal jargon” that you speak of is actually not really jargon at all. It’s very true indeed. We are addicted to oil, period. I don’t have to be force fed to see the blatently obvious fact that this country runs off of oil, and loves it. Im a strong conservative, but not so extreme to the point where I am blind to this fact. Just a few more years Jamie, and I will be carrying you to work if we allow oil to become compeletely diminished without a decent backup plan. We differ on one major issue. I don’t believe that ANWR is the key to healing the energy crisis. I’ll state again that ANWR is truly nothing more than a tourist attraction. And more oil from ANWR would have probably only fed our addiction even more. After All! ANWR would have lowered gas prices! But you hear nothing about how it would have helped further our research towards efficient energy ideas on the blog you posted. Which in all honesty is the more important of issues, isn’t it? This is your argument. And im not sure I disagree with you, but you can’t force a comfortable nation to move away from oil, and transition to something else. The article you posted is based off of pure oil-loving bias, not energy research. Was ANWR really the key to our energy success? Maybe. There is really no way to know. But I know one thing, we like oil. We like it a lot.
Cameron, you are again missing the point every person on here has made. The oil drilling is merely the first step of many to resolve this energy crisis. Let me use an analogy if I may. Trying to convert everything to this suprise new energy is like trying to force a baby to eat steak. The kid will eventually love the food but starting it too early could kill the kid. He does not know what to do with it or how to eat it. Much the same with this new energy. If forced on the people too quickly we can not adjust and therefor would severely hurt us. So in this time of transition we need temporary relief. Oil. Not to live on it forever (people are not still drinking out of a bottle) but as a first step in getting us through.
fossil fuels don’t have to be drilled/dug up. google “anything into oil”.
I hope you comment on the “energy bill” that was “shown to congress” today, the bipartisan one.
Don’t forget that the oil industry is subsidized, and has been since the 1910’s.
I’d like to hear what you have to say about ethanol and other “bio-fuels” that are subsidized.
Don’t forget about nuclear. We need reprocessing firms here and more plants would be a great start to getting off oil/coal.
I completely agree with what you are saying Greg. But time probably isn’t on our side with this one. We aren’t necessarily in a bind yet, but we are going to need a successful back up plan within the next few years. I am for temporary relief, but lets not waste this time trying to figure out where we can drill next to supply us for another decade. People are focused on how much oil we can get, and not on how we can use it to temporary relieve our energy struggle. I just don’t see ANY willingness from americans to reach any form of change. And this is our problem.
http://www.charlierose.com/shows/2008/07/15/2/a-conversation-with-amory-lovins