Dems "Scrambling to Run Down the Clock" on GOP Solutions to Help Lower Gas Prices

[Chessplayer]

As soon as you figure out how to pump wind and sun into my car, I'll be all for using it to replace our oil entirely. Until then, you politicians go play hide and go f--- yourselves while the rest of us drill for oil.

Well, we can wait until oil is prohibitively expensive, or start the work on the electric cars now.

But, if we start working on the cars and someone says, "Oh, but we'll just pump it full of electricity made with fossil fuels," then we are right back where we started, consuming fossil fuels and not wanting to build electric cars.

[5stringJeff]

Well, we can wait until oil is prohibitively expensive, or start the work on the electric cars now.

But, if we start working on the cars and someone says, "Oh, but we'll just pump it full of electricity made with fossil fuels," then we are right back where we started, consuming fossil fuels and not wanting to build electric cars.

I think that's a bad argument, for a few reasons. First, we do not get all our electricity from fossil fuels. Second, the proportion of electricity we produce from fossil fuels is likely to drop in the future, as we begin to use alternative sources (nuclear, wind, solar, water). Third, point pollution (i.e. that coming from a power plant) is much easier to regulate (if that's what one desires) or decrease than non-point pollution (i.e. millions of exhaust pipes). Fourth, I believe that electric cars are supposed to use less overall energy than gasoline powered cars (I can't provide a source to that, but I believe I've read it somewhere).

I support building electric cars, immediately if not sooner. I've already written GM, telling them that as soon as the Chevy Volt rolls off the assembly line, I want one.

[Kathianne]

I think that's a bad argument, for a few reasons. First, we do not get all our electricity from fossil fuels. Second, the proportion of electricity we produce from fossil fuels is likely to drop in the future, as we begin to use alternative sources (nuclear, wind, solar, water). Third, point pollution (i.e. that coming from a power plant) is much easier to regulate (if that's what one desires) or decrease than non-point pollution (i.e. millions of exhaust pipes). Fourth, I believe that electric cars are supposed to use less overall energy than gasoline powered cars (I can't provide a source to that, but I believe I've read it somewhere).

I support building electric cars, immediately if not sooner. I've already written GM, telling them that as soon as the Chevy Volt rolls off the assembly line, I want one.

I agree with you. However, I also believe we should harness and exploit our oil also:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aqEDMhrCvp28

Arctic May Hold 90 Billion Barrels of Oil, U.S. Says (Update2)

By Joe Carroll

July 23 (Bloomberg) -- The Arctic may hold 90 billion barrels of oil, more than all the known reserves of Nigeria, Kazakhstan and Mexico combined, and enough to supply U.S. demand for 12 years, the U.S. Geological Survey said.

One-third of the undiscovered oil is in Alaskan territory, the agency found in a study released today. By contrast, a geologic formation beneath the North Pole claimed by Russian scientists last year probably holds just 1.2 percent of the Arctic's crude, the U.S. report showed.

Energy producers such as Royal Dutch Shell Plc and Chevron Corp. have accelerated exploration of the northernmost regions for untapped reserves amid record prices and receding access to deposits in more hospitable climates. Russia's move to scrap a United Nations convention and carve out an exclusive Arctic zone sparked protests from Canada, the U.S., Norway and Denmark.

``Most of the Arctic, especially offshore, is essentially unexplored with respect to petroleum,'' Donald Gautier, the project chief for the assessment, said in the report. ``The extensive Arctic continental shelves may constitute the geographically largest unexplored prospective area for petroleum remaining on Earth.'' ...