Okay, there are basically two different energy policies being proposed to help alleviate a possible energy crisis. Here is a synopsis of both:
Bush/McCain Proposal: They want to “drill here, and drill now”. Basically, they want to reverse a bill signed by Bill Clinton that took away the possibility of drilling for oil offshore of Florida and in Anwar, Alaska. They want to start drilling for oil in North America to take away the dependency on foreign oil, alleviate some of the high prices by increasing supply, and give companies and entrepreneurs a chance to continue development and research for alternative fuel resources.
Obama/Environmentalist Proposal: Continue to pump money into research and development for alternative fuel resources and drastically reduce the consumption of fuel and energy to reduce demand, rather than increase supply.
I think these are both legitimate proposals, but it is hard to tell which one would help in the short-run versus the long-run. My proposal would be a combination of both. Drill now to help alleviate the scarce supply which will cause speculators to back away from driving up the price of oil. But, do this only to give us enough time to develop alternative fuel resources. The alternative fuels is not happening any time soon. This stuff takes time. We need to stop depending so much on what Saudi Arabia and the UAB tells us what to do. We can drill and do it without destroying the environment, but only do it as a temporary solution while we perfect clean, efficient fuels.
What’s your take on this? Comment below.