csr

On Charlie Rose I just saw Mike Huckabee explain that he would strive to achieve energy independence for the U.S. within ten years' time.

Could that possibly be done without the bicycle? I doubt it.

Newspaperguy

Could that even be done with the bicycle? The U.S. imports something like 58 per cent of its petroleum and that figure is expected to increase drastically in the next number of years. It might be possible to eventually find a way to achieve energy independence, but it's going to take a lot longer than a decade.

Ekdog

Did he mention any details? Since he supports the war in Iraq, I wonder if his "energy independence" plan might be the same as Bush's, i.e., occupy petroleum-producing countries and grab their oil.

maddyfish

Could be done. A whole bunch of new nuke plants, no new gas powered personal use cars, electric use only for personal use. Save the oil for the trucking industry.

jonathan180iq

Not unless we greatly downsize our personal consumption habits.

Energy independance and all of the other energy concerns have become a speaking point of politicians because of popular opinion and pop-culture. They are politicians. Very rarely do any of them every actually care about the topics that they claim to be proficient enough in to make national decisions. I hate these pre-election rhetoric speeches. They mean nothing.

If Mike Huckabee, or anyone else for that matter, wants to talk about evironmental issues, they had better show me their level of interest before the topic became popular before they get any of my attention.

gwd

That is one obvious approach. Why isn't it working? Maybe it is, oil is selling at high prices but gasoline is still under $3.00/gallon here. None of the candidates seem to be car free friendly. Even if the country were "energy independent", car free living would be too nice to give up.

crypticlineage

Everyday when I bike to work, I notice that most people are commuting to work in their car by themselves. Hardly ever see any car with two people in it. Even otherwise majority of people travel in their cars by themselves. This is highly wasteful. I simply cannot believe how spoiled drivers are in the west.

Also, what is the deal with young American women and gas guzzling four wheel drive SUVs? I know plenty of females who are deep down in debt and are hardly making ends meet, who would not trade in their truck for a small economical car. What gives?

yes

I also think it could be done if the will is there. It would take a massive switch to coal / nuclear and a big investment in alternatives. Or, a large tax on existing sources would pretty much take care of everything in one fell swoop.

Ekdog

Anyone that gives a damn about the environment should not even be considering burning more coal. If we build more nuclear plants, it should be done in order to move away from coal.

slowjoe66

Huckabee is the real deal. You may or may not agree with him on any issue, but he is one of the rare politicians who is genuine. Not a flip flopper, not a "say whatever will get me elected" guy. Just a legitimate person. Interestingly, I am sure he would be hugely in favor of cycling. He was diagnosed with type 2 diabetes a few years ago and decided to completely overhaul his lifestyle. He began running and lost over 100 pounds and now runs marathons.

kc9eog

And yet he gave a standard worthless feel good response to a very serious question which affects our national security and economy. He is in favor of energy independence huh? He probably also favors health care for orphans, locking up repeat sex offenders, a strong military, and lower taxes so you can keep "your hard-earned money". "I support US energy independence" they say, and what they mean is more drilling, more mining and more subsidies to ethanol producers. It is insulting that they bring up ethanol. Want to show you are doing something about our energy problems? Just say you support more ethanol production and the foolish voters won't notice that we haven't done anything at all. Want to get elected? Just sound pro-farmer for that important Iowa vote so you can start off strong and raise money for your campaign.

Ekdog

I don't know if we should be talking politics here, but I can't let that statement go by without responding.

I wish he'd "flip flop" and change his stance on this terrible war, which he supports. Admitting he was wrong and not allowing any more innocent people to die would make him a much more "legitimate person" in my book.

yes

I tend to agree with you, but the thread was about energy independence

cerewa

Another take on this is that he will not respond to and represent the desires of the electorate, but rather, he will do whatever he personally thinks is right without regard to the opinions of the people he supposedly represents.

Ekdog

I hardly think he is doing what "he personally thinks is right." What Big Oil and AIPAC thinks is in their interest is more like it.

cerewa

Well, there is that possibility too.

csr

One of the biggest problems we face is that there is a lack of public engagement on some level. Public behavior is not consistent with the type and degree of problems we confront. To be specific: We (the U.S.) are at war. Like it or lump it, we effectively are at war. Iraq is quite small, also, compared to what we might end up being engaged in. We have serious debt problems. We the people are making almost no sacrifices at all. There are no special taxes to pay for the war, no volunteering to help out, nothing. I don't even know what one can do, anyway. There are no shortages, so there is no day-to-day reminder of what is going on. And, there is no serious effort to attack the consumption that leads to the excessive interest in that part of the world. Perhaps the media are too concentrated. Perhaps the oil companies have such influence that they more or less collude in avoiding any policy that might amount to a decreased use.

I think if the country went on a serious campaign of promoting public transportation, in some way vilifying or penalizing cars of excessive size and number, and encouraging biking and walking by making roadway paths safe enough for a child to use, we could solve these problems quite rapidly. The country is lethargic and nonresponsive, comatose almost. We keep doing the same things, and keep getting deeper into the doodoo. And we keep getting fatter and fatter, too. We're going to be less and less able to field an army, in fact, because we're so fat and slovenly, and getting worse. Very pampered and selfish and unhealthy.

csr

There is no talk of sacrifice in our country. Just self-fulfillment, and growth. Prosperity and happiness. Somewhere in the distance, some people are "attacking our way of life", but they are like flies at a picnic. Even the war itself is mostly just on credit. Can't slow down that consumption, man, don't slow it down. And get a bigger house too while you're at it. You deserve it. Etc.

One thing I thought was fascinating, I forget where I read it, was that somebody somewhere made some television spots that highlight bicycling and criticize car driving, and the networks wouldn't air them. So we literally can't get anything rolling in the right direction. Can't draw public attention to the idea that biking is better than car use.

gerv 

One thing that amazes me is how the current bunch of presidential candidates seem to dance around a few of these issues. I don't think I've heard any of them recommend a balanced budget... if anyone in the US would even know what that means

Another issue is the current state of the US dollar, which over the last few months has been sinking like a stone. Probably a big factor in why oil is now $95 a barrel.

Roody

Grist has interviews and fact sheets on all presidential candidates' positions on the environment and energy. Read those and we can have a meaningful discussion.

Spoiler Alert: A couple candidates have serious plans for ending not only foreign dependence, but all carbon use. (Hint: they ain't Republicans or the top 2 Democrats.)

csr

"...he praises just about every energy source you can think of -- nuclear, "clean coal," wind, solar, hydrogen, biomass, biodiesel, corn-based ethanol, cellulosic ethanol, oil from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and other untapped domestic areas, and, yes, conservation too." Huckabee

They don't seem to be aware of leg power as an energy source. Hm.

Ekdog

There's no such thing as "clean coal."

Roody

This might refer to coal that's first gasified (to eliminate particulates, toxins, sulfur, etc.) and then burned with a system to capture the carbon that's emitted. The captured carbon is then stored (sequestered), possibly in a depleted oil well. This is evidently doable with present technology. It would probably take carbon taxation to make it economically viable.

Ekdog

According to what I read, "clean coal" is an oxymoron.

Regards,

Ek

Roody

Thanks for the link. The author made some valid points, especially about the extraction of coal being inherently dirty. However, the author is evidently unaware of fairly new technology called "carbon capture and storage" (CCS). This is the cornerstone of most plans to end dependence on foreign energy, while at the same time making a significant reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases.

MIT did an extensive study of coal and CCS technology. Here is a summary of the findings: