Big News on Keystone XL and Our Next Steps

[hockey]

Chase.... it would take at least a decade as most government initiatives do.

Did you know... President Jimmy Carter proposed and got enacted by the Congress a comprehensive energy policy that would have made the U.S. completely independent of foreign oil production today, even if we only acted on just part of his energy plan. This is the same plan Brazil instituted back then and is now benefitting from. Why didn't this plan take hold here??

It would not be impossible to end our dependency as we already have the technology, resources and motivation. It would have to be done over the course of a decade... like adding taxes to oil/gas every year motivating people to make the switch to alternate energy sources.

[Chase]

the alternative energy sources need to be viable, as viable as gas is now.

viable as in economically and efficiency wise, these technologies are not there yet.

[max1]

like adding taxes to oil/gas every year motivating people to make the switch to alternate energy sources.

Money is a powerful motivator, and I would switch right now to electric car IF they made one that was affordable and would do what I want. But right now the technology is so new who knows what the next thing to come along is. I have no problem drilling for oil in this country right now. What I would like to see is some of the money we put into social programs or give to other countries be put into research for alternative fuels. I do not think more taxes on corporations/ big business is the answer.

[cowboygilbert]

@Chase,

viable as in economically and efficiency wise, these technologies are not there yet.

You seem to like getting to the heart of the chase by raising the pertinent question. Is oil really all that viable or efficient? Considering the costs of longer supplies lines than we had in the domestic oil boom years of the 50's-60's, getting oil from remote areas of the globe, hard to reach and difficult to extract without new, complex technology, the necessary costs of upgrading our aging refinery fleet to accept lower grade, more scarce remote oil deposits( one example is the enormous cost that the Delaware City refinery must pay in upgrading the refinery--something other local refineries like Sun Oil 's Marcus Hook plant or Conoco-Philips Trainor facility couldn't afford. Wouldn't just these few examples of enormous costs raise the real price of a gallon of gas way above what the price of a solar or wind powered electricity would cost ? I am not even adding in the even more enormous price we pay for producing oil from its evident environmental risks, pollution problems, health-related problems in the population , and the security costs of keeping access to those remote areas of oil extraction open and available to world markets.


Further, we've spent so much waste of time on debate of whether climate change is 'really real' that we barely have enough time left to develop an alternative energy policy based on the realities of our own resources and the limits of our technological know-how.

[M.Opaliski]

None of those alternatives cited can survive without a subsidy or mandate, or both, that's why they're not viable and that's why they never will be until the American public embraces them, on their own, without be forced to do so

If you're reading this you live in a petroleum based enconomy, it's in everything. You don't have to like the facts but denying them is foolish.

[cowboygilbert]

@M. Opaliski,

You don't have to like the facts but denying them is foolish.None of those alternatives cited can survive without a subsidy or mandate

So, do you mean that Oil can not survive without its subsidies and mandates? Oil is mandated as a primary strategic resource that means the US Government has sole authority for its control ,use and distribution. For all you 'small government' people, the longer we remain an oil-dependent society the greater grows our government size and magnitude to manage such a vital depleting resource. Do we really want a larger,more centralized and stronger federal government?
#173: About the Oil Depletion Protocol | Richard Heinberg


Oil has been a primary strategic resource for decades ... discourage influential politicians from supporting mandated limits on ... Richard Heinberg. ...
richardheinberg.com/173-about-the-oil-depletion-protocol -

There is growing evidence that the rate of world oil production has already entered a plateau, indicating the approaching peak. Yet even if the forecasts that place the peak two decades ahead are correct, there is still cause for immediate concern, as analysis undertaken on behalf of the US Department of Energy indicates that twenty years at a “crash program” scale of effort will be needed prior to the peak to prepare societies adequately. This is because most of the mitigation strategies that are possible (developing supplies of alternative fuels or changing transport infrastructure to use fuel more efficiently) will require enormous amounts of investment and many years of hard effort.
The world is currently unprepared for a sustained decline in oil availability. Indeed, in nearly every recent year the world has increased its demand for oil by over a million barrels per day.
An extended and gradually worsening supply shortfall would lead to economic turmoil. Transportation of people, food, and other goods would be impacted, as would agriculture and the chemicals and plastics industries. Because each of these economic sectors is basic to modern societies, all industries and all segments of the population would feel the effects. High transportation costs would fuel inflation and reduce demand for products while undermining tourism, the automobile industry, and the airline industry. High fuel costs would bankrupt millions of farmers worldwide, leading to an agricultural crisis, while high food transport costs would also conspire to drive up food prices for consumers.

At the same time, oil supply problems are likely to lead to political instability and international conflict. Oil has been a primary strategic resource for decades—the object of wars, coups, and intrigues. As petroleum becomes more scarce and expensive, competition for supplies will grow and economic turmoil could create conditions for armed struggles, perhaps on a massive scale. Civil or international conflict could in turn exacerbate shortages and undermine investment in new energy sources and technologies and the accompanying processes of transition and adaptation.

of all chemical pollutants issuing from the use of oil and other fossil fuels, perhaps none has more worrisome potential consequences than the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2). Burning fossil fuels releases CO2, which traps heat from the Sun, gradually warming the oceans, the atmosphere, and the Earth’s surface. The consequences of this warming effect are likely to be a less stable climate, worse storms, the disruption of agriculture, rising sea levels, and pressure on species to adapt to changing habitats. Carbon dioxide is naturally present in the atmosphere in such small quantities (0.036%) that the massive amounts released through the burning of fossil fuels have already measurably altered the Earth’s climate.

In short, our current reliance on oil is unhealthy and unsustainable. It is imperative, for a variety of compelling reasons, that societies find ways to wean themselves from petroleum dependency as quickly as possible.

[M.Opaliski]

I didn't realize Petroleum was an alternative. Oh wait...

[hockey]

"To curb America’s perilous oil addiction, we need effective government policies that will increase the availability and use of efficient vehicles and clean fuels, as well as promote smart growth and public transit." ~ NRDC

I see Petrol stations closing all over Europe as more people use public transport and cut their addiction to cars. America was built on roads and freeways and they do love their HEMI's (I hear your dick falls off if you don't drive a car with a gas hogging HEMI in it?) .... improving the rails, put minimum limits on MPG (current 28 bump up to 32 then 50+ [CAFE]) for all newly manufactured vehicles, increase E, Fuel Cells, Hybrid and micro hybrid or even Thorium (my fav) powered autos into production, more solar energy tax breaks, more wind power.... it's all there.

The technology is there.....some of it is sitting on shelves, some still in the labs but it's THERE.

Maybe if the oil industry would get their lobbyists off of the hill, then we could get people educated and interested in renewable energy. The oil industry has so much $ and power over the government.... they put so much BS out there and the less educated public buys it hook, line and sinker. Fossil fuels are bad..... it's simple science. Sadly, even the word "science" has been spun into a bad word from these Oil funded lobbyists and PR people.

[Tralee]

Hockey, I'm going to have to somewhat disagree. Europe is smaller than America, or rather each country in Europe is smaller than America. It's not that we arent interested, it's just that Mass transit is just not as feasible in America with our vast open spaces. It's also expensive to implement. The train system in the UK and probably all over Europe is very well established, but you have to admit, it's pretty expensive. It actually was cheaper for us to fly to Heathrow from Glasgow than to take the train, we took the train because we really enjoy the trip, but, bottom line, it was much more expensive and of course, much longer. Until we have a really viable source of long distance fuel for our autos, it's going to be hard to change America. I'd love an electric car, but they just can't possibly fit my needs as they are now. We need oil to use NOW while we explore other viable alternatives. Why does no one ever mention nuclear? It would be small, could probably do the trick for the hours and miles needed in America and probably would be cheaper in the long run. What is Thorium? I've never heard of that.

[hockey]

Why does no one ever mention nuclear? It would be small, could probably do the trick for the hours and miles needed in America and probably would be cheaper in the long run. What is Thorium? I've never heard of that.

Uhhhhhg
Click Here


I know Europe is smaller than the US. I know it would take time but not here, in the most populated area on Earth (Boston to DC). Expensive? Owning, maintaining a car, the insurance, parking, gas.... trust me, rails are cheaper. Only one person in my Euro family owns a car... a retired black cab that everyone on the street borrows for emergencies and mini breaks out of London.

[M.Opaliski]

I take the Train to Europe all the time, it's lovely...

[Tralee]

Uhhhhhg
Click Here


I know Europe is smaller than the US. I know it would take time but not here, in the most populated area on Earth (Boston to DC). Expensive? Owning, maintaining a car, the insurance, parking, gas.... trust me, rails are cheaper. Only one person in my Euro family owns a car... a retired black cab that everyone on the street borrows for emergencies and mini breaks out of London.

I understand that, but what about the Midwest? Of course the eastern corridor could be made semi-useful, but, you would still have to break the habits of the typical American who just leaves the house, whenever, and goes where they want, whenever they want. Realistically, we don't want to wait for even 5 min. if we want to quickly run to the store for an onion or whatever. We are way to used to going where we want, when we want. That is America, Europe has a completely different mind set, more in lock step with the establishment, more uniform, much less independent. That is a huge change and not one that will come overnight or even in a decade. We are way to independent to have a majority of us be beholden to schedules and stops and all the stuff that connotes public transportation. Again, what is Thorium? Is that a nuclear type fuel? Of course it can be done, but no amount of monetary punishment will speed it up.

[cowboygilbert]

@Tralee,

We need oil to use NOW while we explore other viable alternatives.

Unfortunately, we don't have the oil like we did in the 50's and 60's when it was over-abundant, cheap ,and easily accessible with simple technology. After 60 years of incredible US and world economic growth and development based on cheap oil ,we've burned up all of the easiest extractable oil resources on Earth. In the process of this once-ever spurt of economic development we have also caused some serious ,near irreversible changes in our climate stability , more frequent extreme storms, rising sea levels , toxic increase levels of arsenic in our warming oceans , etc. America wasn't built on the love of our cars , roads and the interstate--that had been a very recent innovation since WW II , Eisenhower's Interstate Highway Act was based on the assumption of cheap oil resources lasting forever ---- The Interstate Highway Act did more to uproot and destroy the traditional Americana of small towns, village hamlets, small -scale family farming communities , and the smaller, more diverse city landscape of ethnic neighborhoods closely interdependent, but autonomous . As for the argument that mass transit systems and national rail lines were never "feasible or established " in America . it is a bogus argument. Anyone who can remember grandparents who lived around the beginning of the 20th century and told them accurate stories of those times can attest to the cleanliness, regular scheduling, and highly efficient urban mass transit systems in our small and large cities of the 1920's -1950's .

[hockey]

Again, what is Thorium? Is that a nuclear type fuel? Of course it can be done, but no amount of monetary punishment will speed it up.

Click on the link below, the blue word "Thorium"....ok?

Thorium