By eliminating offshore drilling we only increase our dependence on foreign oil. We certainly need clean alternative energy sources, however, we are a long ways away from being able to implement these cleaner measures due to the interdependence of industries that tie in w/ oil.

We have choices other than foreign oil but they cost more. As the price of gas continues it's climb, the other alternatives will gain more favor. The problem is catastrophic if the supply gets rapidly shut off. We should prepare ourselves and electric bikes are a great way.

Cost to charge the battery on a Pedego Electric Bike: about 15 cents for a range of 15 to 30 miles.

While we must endeavor to convert to cleaner alternative energy sources, we must also do so in a gradual manner as a means of not shocking the economy into further dispair. Green technology is a wonderful idea, however, if implemented in such a manner that does not allow oil interdependent industries to convert over time it will cause a cataclysmic disruption in our economy that will make our current economic problems look like a party.

During the electricity crisis than ultimately unseated Gray Davis, Californian's were asked to reduce their electricity consumption and we did - by up to 20% by some estimates. Better technology like LED lighting and ultra efficient appliances make a difference as do small steps repeated on a large scale like turning off electronics entirely (via adding a $ 5 power strip). Much of our nations electricity (California does do much better here) comes from coal and shale (oil enriched shale) so reducing electricty not only can be done - it has been done. So the argument that we won't use less or conservation doesn't matter is not true and observed to be not true. When gas shot up to $4.50 a gallon in the summer of 2008, people reduced their driving by about 30% proving we can do it if we care enough. Add conservation to a requirement to drive a vehicle that gets 20/ miles to the gallon or greater will have a huge impact on our dependence on oil - foreign or not.

@ William Burg:

Do heroin/drug addicts quit cold turkey or are they gradually weened off their vices? Same thing here in the sense that we are addicted to oil because it is cheap, easy, and abundant. The overnight conversion that you speak of equivalent of economic suicide. Considering that the U.S. has NEVER had a comprehensive energy plan, gradual implementation isn't such a bad idea.

I never said anything about there not being a problem as the problem is/has/will continue(s) to hold our economy hostage. You are 100% correct in asserting that we have known the ills of being dependent on oil for quite a long time, however, only until recently has there been a serious dialogue regarding how bad the situation really is. My thoughts are that implementation of the aforementioned ideas should take place over a 10-30 year period. During this time frame there should be benchmarks that should be met as a means of assuring that we are hitting our goals. By setting the goals and ensuring incremental progress we can ultimately hit our goal of being off oil and utilizing clean energy sources that are renewable and environmentally friendly.

AB32 was passed in 2006 and its provisions were enacted in 2008. The benchmarks for emissions standards were to return California to 1990 levels with immediate implementation. The proof that immediate implementation of this type of legislation is dangerous lies in the fact that we have lost 1.1 million jobs and a myriad of California businesses have ventured to neighboring states that have no such legislation. Perhaps if the provisions of AB32 would have been implemented over time our economy wouldn't be the debacle it is today.

By the way, I guess in all of years in social work you have never heard of a methadone clinic.

I am obviously not a fan of drastic change as it pertains to oil. I think we should continue to explore safer alternatives such as slant drilling that are less invasive on the environment. In the meantime, auto manufacturers should gradually increase production of hybrid vehicles and ultimately end up in a place where we can mass produce an automobile that does not run on gasoline. Of course, this process will take time.

I understand that this can be a very difficult issue that we all struggle with in one way or another. As unique individuals, we each have our own way of approaching the problem.

However, we are all just human being and fundamentally we are the same. We all have a conscience that connects us to the wisdom of the ages and the wisdom of the heart. I think we can all agree on certain basic principles like stewardship, compassion, freedom and justice.

I believe that if we can be quiet just for one minute and just LISTEN, I mean really LISTEN, to our hearts, what we hear may not be the same thing coming out our mouths or from the mouths of our leaders or from the television set and radio.

Imagine yourself living on the Gulf Coast...

In you minds eye, picture the oil rushing up from the depths as you are reading this, and all the death and destruction and disease it represents the the people and wildlife living there...

Sit down and have dinner with the grieving family of a fisherman that just blew his brains out while working on the clean up...

Join the living fisherman for a day's work helping with the cleanup effort and sense their sorrow and frustration and hopelessness...

Will you please LISTEN for just one minute???

"Are you quite sure that the loss of jobs in California didn't have just a wee bit to do with that housing bubble and Great Recession that we have all heard so much about? You haven't shown that those jobs were lost specifically because of AB32, you're basically guessing."

Sure, they contributed to the problem as did AB32. See for yourself: http://sbaction.org/get_resource.php?table=resource_kmqap4_18z4ys&id=kmqaq1_1ed1wo

"I'm not convinced that hybrid cars or even electric cars are much more than replacement therapies. They are still dependent on a high energy consumption system that is inefficient in its use of land and resources. In the long term, depending on high-powered metal boxes to carry us everywhere is an idea we're going to have to change. It's just plain not good for us."

What is your alternative?

What savings? The disparity between the number of green jobs created from AB32 as opposed to the number of jobs lost is vast. In fact, the overwhelming majority of green jobs that have been created in California are federally subsidized through the Economic Recovery Act of 2009. In other words, it's akin to corporate welfare.

What happens when those subsidies run out? What happens when these green companies have to compete in the open market w/ all of the California business regulation and taxes? I'll tell you exactly what will happen. They will leave just like every other business that has figured this out the hard way. When all of the businesses have left California and all that's left is SEIU, teachers, and corrections who is going to pay the bills around here?

OK, I kind of went on a tangent here, but I think you get my drift.

Bubba, You do bring up some good points. Doesn't sound like your oppossed to a greener future. But hate to say it, I heard the same arguments back in 1973. e.g. last time we knew we were in trouble,

We need to save what oil we have left for the modern miracles of the 20th C. Not to be burned needlessly in inefficient fuel cars, trucks. Maybe think of the future this way: The gov't mandates all new construction with mandatory thin film solar on every roof, wind turbine farms in every backyard, mandatory hybrid technology in every industrial, commercial and private vehicle by 2020. And there is enough NiHi to build the batteries (which are recyclable.). And unfortunatley, even the Sierra Club has admitted that nucleur is in our future.

And unfortunatley, govenrment subsidizes big oil with billions of dollars that could have gone into renewables. If we had the fortitiude back in 1973, none of this deep sea drilling, artic drilling and foreign oil would be needed (read national security issue big time).

But as others have stated, the addict usually won't break the habit on his own. It takes gov't intervention just like it did with the Clean Air and Water acts of the early 1970's. And talk about jobs? These two acts alone created thousands of jobs nationwide. Mostly in the private sector.

But since this isn't the EU where the above could come true (see Germany's very successful State Sanctioned, Funded Alt. Energy initiative in tandem with private industry like Siemens). The problem with the U.S. is it has too many freedoms. Freedom to destroy people's lives (Wall Street) and squander our children's future for energy independence for the "Sacred Cow of Private Enterprise gone awry"

Pappy:

Not opposed to a greener future at all. In fact, I support conversion to green technology. The difference between myself and some is that I support this over time. If some here had a clue as to how economic systems work (especially as it pertains to interdependence) this conversation would be a moot point.

In closure, this is without a doubt the best thread I have particiapted in at Sac Press. Thanks to William Burg. He argues his point well (although I don't agree w/ him).

A very good thread!