We can't forswear use of fossil fuels

I think Mike Tidwell, the writer of the column "Let's make history again" , is in dire need of a new prescription to cure his energy myopia.

[Mike Calo]

Oh that we were irrevocably tied to trains. The number of people who could be moved for the same amount of fossil fuel (or the resultant electricity from the burning thereof) would save millions of barrels of oil a year.

[Ken Leary]

I have to agree with Mr.Harsanyi. It would be great to be completely independent of fossil fuels and I think that this will eventually be the case. It's something that Our Government should have been working on for at least the last thirty years.However, in the meantime, We need oil.

[city resident]

We also need people who don't just think about themselves and buy into whatever US auto manufacturers want them to think. The SUV was a huge marketing scheme that made the industry quick cash on cars that 90% of the buyers had no need for. As a population we have become advertising zombies, unable to think for ourselves about what would be best. How about not spending 2 hours of your life every single day just to get to your job. Your supposed 40 hour work week becomes 50 just because of that. Fossil fuels are one of those habits we can break ourselves if we just follow some common sense when buying homes and looking for employment. Hopefully we haven't lost our ability to think independent of advertising.

[HoCo guy]

city resident saises a good point. Lets everyone quit their good paying jobs (maybe dc area government, or similar) and we can all go to fast food joints near our homes. Get real. Every person should be made to be forced to hear T. Boone Pickens Congressional hearing testimony and then they would know what has to be done. Drill Now! Oil is going to be around maybe 50 years or so and then we need something else. In the meantime to keep this country running we need to dill for oil and natural gas, now. Don't believe the rumor we have 200 years of oil in our country.

[Safe Driver]

Ken Leary wrote:

I have to agree with Mr.Harsanyi. It would be great to be completely independent of fossil fuels and I think that this will eventually be the case. It's something that Our Government should have been working on for at least the last thirty years.However, in the meantime, We need oil.

Absolutely. I have no idea what these people are thinking when they say that are against new drilling and exploration, or we can`t drill our way out of this problem. There are roughly 250 MILLION automobiles on the road. It is going to take DECADES to replace them with alternatives. The millions of 18 wheelers and other large trucks wont be replaced by hybrids or electrics. Electric motors wont get passenger jets off the ground.
If we don`t start exploring and drilling the resources we have, this problem is only going to compound. We need to drill NOW.

[Surf52]

city resident wrote:

We also need people who don't just think about themselves and buy into whatever US auto manufacturers want them to think. The SUV was a huge marketing scheme that made the industry quick cash on cars that 90% of the buyers had no need for. As a population we have become advertising zombies, unable to think for ourselves about what would be best. How about not spending 2 hours of your life every single day just to get to your job. Your supposed 40 hour work week becomes 50 just because of that. Fossil fuels are one of those habits we can break ourselves if we just follow some common sense when buying homes and looking for employment. Hopefully we haven't lost our ability to think independent of advertising.

Tyhe SUV and the van markets were a response to the first round of downsizing when the average family realized that you could not pack Mom, Dad and three kids into a Honda Civic for a long ride with any comfort.

You may not need to go tearing through the underbrush in the Baja, but you could pack the kids, a stroller, three suitcases, and still have room to bring Fido if you wanted to.

The SUV may not have been the most practical answer but it was what was available.

Answers aren't always so simple.

[Soulless]

agreed. given the way gas prices, economy issues are, i guarantee that you'll see a shift in choices for vehicles. even the hummer brand is discontinuing some of it's line, as people can no longer justify spending that much for gas.

[elroy]

Soulless wrote:

agreed. given the way gas prices, economy issues are, i guarantee that you'll see a shift in choices for vehicles. even the hummer brand is discontinuing some of it's line, as people can no longer justify spending that much for gas.

biggest problem with the hummer is that for all it is supposed to do it is basically uncomfortable and other than superior off road ability it can not compete with the other higher mileage vehicles. Its tow rating is low compared to the alternatives. my tow vehicle gets 19 mpg average and can pull 16500lbs of trailer anywhere you want it to go.(and yes I do use it for this) I have never used the 4x4 option on this truck and I dont see that happening in the near future, however it came with it so Im stuck there.

when honda comes out with the hybrid that gets 70mpg while we sit in comfort for 500 miles while towing my 12,000 lb trailer, I will be the first in line to get it.

[westmonster]

HoCo guy, we are drilling now. Even if we expanded domestic oil production by 50% tomorrow it would still only account for a fraction of our total oil usage. The answer is not to drill for more oil. The industry itself is against this, after all it owns tens of millions of acres of offshore sites known to house oil, and yet they have not drilled in these areas. Why? its in their best interest not to drastically increase production making it harder to demand outrageous prices.

This is why the whole Bush proposal to lift the ban on offshore drilling is a joke. First of all there was no ban, its called a moratorium. And it was put in place because the expected benefit of drilling in many of these areas would be offset by huge environmental costs to our coasts and offshore fisheries.

All the "drill now" idiots are completely delusional. They honestly believe that an increase in drilling will immediately lead to an increase in oil production and therefore a reduction in prices at the pump. Wake up and get your heads out of Bush's a-s-s.

[westmonster]

And Safe Driver, it would not take decades to replace our autos with alternatives. Look up Brazil, 85% of new car sales are "flex-fuel" models which can run on petrol or ethanol. Brazil is now energy self sufficient and guess what, the vast majority of their eco-friendly vehicles which don't need to run on oil are made by GM. Thats right, the American company General Motors. I'm sick of hearing all that crap "we can't do it here". Our companies are already doing it overseas. Too bad theres a huge tariff on Brazilian ethanol.

[Ken Leary]

3972Westmonster,how come everytime You get into posting, You have to go negative. I am college educated Sir and while certainly not the smartest Person in the World, I'm no Idiot.Also, this discussion is about energy and typically, You have to drag Your favorite Pinata , George Bush into the discussion. My not wanting to pay $4.00 a gallon for gas has absolutely nothing to do with Who is in the Whitehouse.3972

[Ken Leary]

Sorry, I had a little problem posting this.

[westmonster]

Ken, I apologize if you took offense to my comments. I certainly didn't mean to point you out specifically and perhaps I should have moderated my language. I don't totally disagree with what you had to say, yes we do need oil at the present time, and unfortunately the oil companies are finding out just how much we "need" oil like a bunch of junkies.

However the Bush policy on energy has contributed to our current situation. And his administration continues to use "smoke and mirrors" to address the problem. Such as suggesting drilling off our coasts. This will not help our situation now or in the future. Domestic production will never account for our total energy needs so long as our energy is heavily reliant on oil.

[Ken Leary]

I don't always agree with You but at least Your statements are well thought out.Regardless of Who shoulders most of the blame for Our current predicament, the fact remains thet this is where We are and hopefully people can stop squabbling and finger pointing and work together to arrive at a viable solution. Peace Westmonster BTW clever handle

[westmonster]

Agreed Ken, we're in a predicament, this is a problem we all should be working together to address and fix. Not everyone is going to agree on the solutions or even the origin of the various related problems, yet I think people on both sides of the political spectrum can at least agree that this dilemma can only be tackled by massive bipartisan cooperation.

[JOE]

Mike Calo wrote:

Oh that we were irrevocably tied to trains. The number of people who could be moved for the same amount of fossil fuel (or the resultant electricity from the burning thereof) would save millions of barrels of oil a year.

Yeah, try it on the Eastern Shore, we can't even get bus service.

[JOE]

city resident wrote:

We also need people who don't just think about themselves and buy into whatever US auto manufacturers want them to think. The SUV was a huge marketing scheme that made the industry quick cash on cars that 90% of the buyers had no need for. As a population we have become advertising zombies, unable to think for ourselves about what would be best. How about not spending 2 hours of your life every single day just to get to your job. Your supposed 40 hour work week becomes 50 just because of that. Fossil fuels are one of those habits we can break ourselves if we just follow some common sense when buying homes and looking for employment. Hopefully we haven't lost our ability to think independent of advertising.

That's a good point, we can get cars that make 32 MPH, but they can't move in the traffic tie-ups we have all over the state. Now eliminating most of these tie-ups would save a HUGE amount of fuel. Can't make 32 MPG sitting still for 45 minutes on the way home, no matter what kind of car you own.

[JOE]

Ken Leary wrote:

I don't always agree with You but at least Your statements are well thought out.Regardless of Who shoulders most of the blame for Our current predicament, the fact remains thet this is where We are and hopefully people can stop squabbling and finger pointing and work together to arrive at a viable solution. Peace Westmonster BTW clever handle

Nope, sorry, only viable solution on hand is to drill. The other solution is to talk about other solutions, which sounds great, but really isn't doing anything. The Democrats have been in power for the last two years, do you see any movement in this direction, no just talk. Hey I can do that. Someone has to take these people to task and yes drill, but while we are drilling, also seek alternative ways. But if you don't drill soon, there won't be a United States of America that you see today, it will be owned mostly by the arab nations, and throw in Venezuela too.

[anon]

we're in a jam created by pill poppin radio man and his horde of ignoramus listeners. "go forth, overmultiply, and eat as much red meat and donuts as you can stuff in your fat gullets"
No- I think not. Actions have consequences, resources aren't infinite. Deregulation of electric, finance, corporations made some fat cats fatter, but look around- it was a net loss. If government is broken, fix it; throw the bums out. Feeding it all to the inner circle got us where we are.

[Tom]

Surf52 wrote:

<quoted text>
Tyhe SUV and the van markets were a response to the first round of downsizing when the average family realized that you could not pack Mom, Dad and three kids into a Honda Civic for a long ride with any comfort.
You may not need to go tearing through the underbrush in the Baja, but you could pack the kids, a stroller, three suitcases, and still have room to bring Fido if you wanted to.
The SUV may not have been the most practical answer but it was what was available.
Answers aren't always so simple.

The SUV market was a response to the fact that Americans are still in love with big cars and that station wagons became uncool. So now, instead of long and low we have tall and fat, sans tail fins. While you may not be able to pack Mom, Dad and three kids into a Honda Civic for a long ride, you could do it in a Honda Accord. But why, when we could afford the luxury of packing in the kids and all their crap into something bigger and heavier than anything our parents ever drove, and look cool and sporty doing it. Fine, but lets call it what it is, a luxury, not a necessity. If you can still afford it, good for you. If not, then pack light and leave the dog at home.