New Facts May Shift Energy Debate

by Deacon Blues

While the Bush/Cheney energy policy was running rampant in this country, we were told that our energy future rested on more offshore oil drilling, more nuclear power, more coal, and more far-off technologies like hydrogen cells and the like. And we were also pursuing a "take the supplies we need" foreign policy at a cost of trillions of dollars, rather than investing a fraction of that amount in domestic and alternative sources like wind, solar, and natural gas.

No one should be surprised that a new government estimate reveals a significant undercounting of our domestic natural gas supplies, rendering the need for more coal and nuclear plants moot. Natural gas is cheap now, and likely to stay that way with supply and demand factors in our favor. Plus, natural gas is the back-up energy source for wind-generated energy, making wind power expansion plans advocated by the likes of T. Boone Pickens and the conversion of heavy equipment to natural gas all the more feasible. Plus, a new study out today shows that the nuclear power industry would reap a huge windfall through an expansion of that industry as advocated by Dick Cheney, because they'd be able to transfer trillions in risk and cost onto taxpayers.

Mr. President, may I suggest a new stimulus bill that focuses solely on energy independence and alternative fuels, a real commitment to a new electrical grid, and accelerated means to ramp up domestic natural gas usage, rather than handing out stimulus monies to the coal industry? And while you are at it, you might score a lot of points by kicking Mr. Holder in the ass to investigate why gas prices are going up at a time when supplies and demand compared to last year might suggest otherwise.