Why do liberals think that by NOT drilling offshore we can become independent of foreign oil?

There are approximately 250 million registered vehicles on the road today,plus trains and ships commercial of about 12,746,126.





So how in the world can we fuel ALL of these vehicles on technology that is NOT invented yet? They all run on oil based fuel, not some pipe dream of ';green fuel';, why is Obama not using his ';highly intellectual'; brain and allowing us to drill NOW?Why do liberals think that by NOT drilling offshore we can become independent of foreign oil?
Because the magic energy fairy is going to wave her magic wand and alternative fuel sources are going to magically appear.








Or at least the plan is to use our vast supply on alternative fuel sources...How? Don't bother them with the pesky little detailsWhy do liberals think that by NOT drilling offshore we can become independent of foreign oil?
I think offshore drilling is a little overrated. I think we should be drilling on US lands plain and simple. And I think this is where the Obama administration is showing a clear lack of common sense. He needs to stop catering to the energy lobbyist and tell them they need to come up with X number of barrels of oil via this SITE thats not being used, this SITE thats not being used, this SITE thats not being used, and this SITE thats not being used. Get my drift. And he should create a strategic reserve that will marginalize the OPEC regimes. C'mon oil is at 40 dollars and the DOW is at 6800; When the DOW was at 8500 oil was $33. The OPEC cartels are still able to squeeze us of a few extra bucks. Not to mention Energy Companies are making more of a margin on gasoline now that the price is low and knowing since the consumer is used to being jacked they can make that extra few cents now that price are at some-what of a bottom.
We arent looking to become independant in the oil industry, we are looking to become the hub of the new industries of natural and renewable energies-wind,water,solar and such. Causing such scars to our natural enviorment would be a waste. by putting all resources into making the new technologies as soon as possible, we will be doing the best for our planet AND our pocketbooks
I have been very curious about this. I think liberals are not interested in becoming energy independent through obtaining our own oil. They view oil as the problem regardless of where it comes from. These same people are driving their cars everyday and complaining about high gas prices. There's some hypocrisy there.
We don't have enough of it to make a dent in our usage. If we use what we have (drill for more) it won't do anything to fix our problem. So why ruin the surroundings for nothing? I would be all for drilling if it would make a difference.
Because we only produce 3% of the world's oil while we consume 25% of it.





As far as I'm concerned, drilling is all well and good, but only for the purpose of bolstering our Strategic Petroleum Reserves for an emergency.
brazil is now completely dependent on alternative fuel, they no longer use oil, they use sugarcane, the technology is out there we just havent adapted to it yet
OK genius: What happens when we run out of offshore oil?





Sorry, my mistake





OK genius: What happens when we run out of offshore oil before developing a viable alternative?
we have oil. it's not a shortage. so why drill for more. we need to get off of it. We gotta go through ';withdrawal';. He knows what he's doing. That's why he's president and your not. relax..
';Drill Baby Drill!';





PALIN 2012





(and NOT Jindal the ';Walt Disney Candidate';.)
Drilling is fine anywhere you find oil.


You must however ensure that no damage to beaches or wildlife will occur.
Because that would require thinking, not feeling.
Because they are as smart as dirt.
They WANT the US economy to fall to its knees so mother earth will get well.
just one more thing they ignore.


remember its all about feelings,not facts.
increase public transportation. may buses now run on clean natural gas (like propane) not fuel. nevermind that they've already built cars that run on vegetable oil and require little modification of cars we already have. less horse power, but who really needs 500 horse power





increase funding to build these cars (solar, electric, etc. they do exist, companies just decided there was no market for them and were wrong)





recycle and use what we have more efficiently (most of foreign oil goes into the production of things like plastic, jet fuels, etc and most of it is wasted because we're gluttons. we need to use what we have better)





also, seriously look into magnetic trains and such. they go slightly over half as fast as jets (which is still pretty fast) and use not even 1% of the amount of fuel jets do. they cost about 200 million to build and implement. cheap? no, but you'll get your money back in ticket sales. it's just another bit of technology america just wouldn't consider, but it utilized in other parts of the world.





it's all about thinking outside the box. besides, even if we start drilling now, we won't have the oil for another 10 years (it doesn't come out of the ground and go into a pump). and by that time, technology will have advanced even if we do NOTHING (dont' fund the sciences, etc). so what will the point have been? you'll have caused massive destruction for no purpose.
Back in the middle 1970s people cautioned that we need to find alternatives to middle eastern oil, during the oil embargoes, and there was talk of finding alternative energy sources, as soon as the embargo ended the talk about alternative fuel sources was stopped.


Last summer when gas gasoline prices topped 4.00 dollars a gallon, the talked renewed about the need for alternatives, as soon as the price of oil dropped and gasoline dropped to as low as 1.30 a gallon, the talk stopped again.


Then Obama made a key mistake with vetoing Former President Bush's bill, allowing off shore drilling and drilling in the Alaska wilderness, with treehuggers leading the march.


What they will not admit is that drilling is safer today, than at any other point in history, which is the number one complaint by treehuggers and environmentalist's, although it would not end our dependence on foreign oil, it would greatly reduce it, while the hunt for an alternative to crude oil.


Obama vetoed Bush's bill, that opened those areas offshore and the Alaskan Wilderness, where it wouldn't have ended our dependence on foreign oil, it would have greatly reduced it, however, foreign governments control the price by the amount they drill and export, if they want to raise the price, they drill less, if they want it lower the drill more and export it. Simple as that.
It's sad to see propaganda victims like you pretend to have any intelligence at all. Big Oil already owns the rights to drill millions of acres of land within the USA. They chose not to drill. They want the rights to the offshore drilling just to have the monopoly.





Drilling offshore makes it more likely that there will be oil spills and pollution of the ocean, some of our most sensitive natural areas, and ruin some of our biggest tourist draws. What part of that don't you understand?





Remember JFK's challenge to go to the moon? We need the same drive to find alternate energy. As some else mentioned, Brazil has become energy independent, and so should the USA. Start thinking outside the box!
We're ';Drilling'; all over the place, including offshore.