The producers of oil have been demonized, the practice of
"fracking" has been maligned as irresponsible, moratoriums on
drilling for oil and mining for coal have been implemented, and some
have suggested we strengthen, with government stimulus funding, the
alternative energy efforts to find ways to provide alternative
sources of energy, including solar power, wind power and water power.
At this current point in our national development, those alternative
sources are not nearly as marketable in society at large as is the
dependence on fossil fuels.
It may seem like I am an advocate of everything Big Oil; the fact
is, I believe we need to do something to protect our planet from
being soiled to the point of interfering with life. But the reality
is that we have during the last century put ourselves in a position
that has brought us to a dependency on the fossil fuels we must have
to run industrial nations, irrespective of their political ideology.
At this point on the spectrum of human existence, we have sold our
souls to the use of fossil fuels such as oil and coal. Without those
things we would be required to return to the so-called Middle Ages,
when ships depended on wind and travel depended on feet. The truth
is, no person in any industrialized society or otherwise would be
willing to give up the industrialization and technological advances
we have with oil. Remember, much more is made from oil than just
gasoline. Look around the environment: Literally tens of thousands
of "things" are made from oil derivatives.
Now, having said all of that, in politically driven societies
like any society in the West or the East that has risen above the
mere existence of tribal life that may be found only in some African
countries, or the National Geographic Magazine, or the so-called
Third World countries, we have to contend with "special interest
groups" and lobbyists who exert tremendous influence to campaigns on
both sides of the aisle, where politicians profit substantially by
talking out of both sides of their mouth. The example of our supply
of fossil fuels is a case in point. Studies have revealed that in
North America we have reserves in oil and natural gas that would
eliminate the need to get oil from the Middle East, where people are
trying to wreck our society. We already get a large supply of our
oil from Mexico and Canada, but the political, environmental,
special interest groups and lobbyists will compel us to continue to
use the vast amounts of oil imported from other countries since they
are effectively persuading the current politicians in power to
prevent the use of domestic oil reserves.
If for some reason the United States alone decided to completely
abandon the use of fossil fuels and return to the life of the
farmers as in Laura Ingalls Wilder's "Little House," using coal oil
only to light the nighttime darkness and the horses, mules and oxen
to turn the soil in the fields, how long do we think China, North
Korea, Iran, Russia, or Western Europe for that matter, would allow
America to stand as a nation? How many people would give up their
flat-screen, plasma, 60-inch, wall-mounted, HD television sets in
favor of returning to front porch sitting to fulfill their social
craving? Who is in favor of giving up the Internet, Android or the iPhone for smoke signals? I suspect that most people would have
problems with that lifestyle, and we would likely see wholesale
rioting in the streets if we should flip the switch from the 21st to
the 19th century.
[to top of second column] |
Likely that scenario would end with the "dreadful" rich leaving
for greener pastures to live in the 21st century somewhere else in
the world, while those with no or less means would remain at the
mercy of a "survival of the fittest" type of society. Gone would be
basic essentials such as clean water, sewage systems,
transportation, jobs, grocery stores changing to bartering systems,
communications except for person-to-person, healthcare except for
homeopathic home remedies and of course, life expectancy.
I believe there is a real significant difference between the
character of a person who lived at the end of the 18th century, 19th
century and the industrial age at the beginning of the 20th century.
Those people were motivated with a work ethic that drove them to
invent what we have today. "Necessity is the mother of invention,"
and those people looked forward to making life more comfortable and
providing a better world for their children. Contrasting our
modern character, whose mainstay is more dependency than fortitude,
the work ethic has dwindled to expectations of anticipation of
higher minimum wages instead of entrepreneurial risk. The poor in
America are just as dependent on ease and comfort as the rich in
America. The rich may shop on Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills and pay
$700 for a shirt, but the poor have Wal-Mart, strip malls, bargain
basements, thrift stores, department stores and perhaps even
hand-me-downs for knockoffs that at least give the appearance of
some prosperity. Retail outlets provide opportunities for
appliances, gym membership, used cars, discount vacations and
generic food with plain labels that provide meals of nourishment
that in some countries people are as unlikely to obtain such
delicacies as many Americans would have difficulty obtaining meals
at the Waldorf. So, perhaps our country should consider moving
toward alternative energy sources on an incremental basis and
titrate our reliance on oil on a gradual course that maintains our
standard of living comparable to the 21st century rather than
gutting modernism in favor of tribalism. Therefore, we should stop
with the war between the environmentalists and the producers of
energy to whom we are in deep dependence at the present time.
Perhaps it is time for the "leaders" in Washington to stop sitting
on their thumbs debating nonessentials and get to work creating a
plan that will carry our nation into future generations with sound
doctrine for renewable energy, sound education, strong protection
from outside harm, reasonable healthcare, fairness in taxes and a
return to the work ethics of yesteryear to propel us as leaders for
finding answers to domestic and worldwide problems afflicting the
human condition.
[By JIM KILLEBREW]
Click here to respond to the editor about this
article.
|