Why is it either Or? A Reply

Michael: Clearly a multi-pronged approach to energy is necessary for the long term security of our nation. We currently have very large federal and state subsidies (our tax dollars) for alternative energy sources such as wind, solar, ethanol, geothermal and others. That approach is fine to a point but all of the alternative energy sources put together are a drop in the bucket when compared to what we currently use and need. In fact, if we cut our use to the bare bone, it would still be a drop in the bucket. Over a period of decades, alternative energy sources may provide a larger percentage, particularly if a technological breakthrough occurs in something like cellulosic ethanol or ethanol from algae or even something from nanotechnology. In the meantime while we are working on alternatives we have to live and the only way we can is to 1. produce more oil, 2. build numerous nuclear power plants and 3. build a coal to liquid and coal to gas industry.
The whole sale abandonment of carbon based energy is neither possible or advisable for many years. A balanced realistic energy policy is essential and the drill here, drill now, pay less mantra illustrates a vital segment of a balanced policy. Anyone who attempts to exclude either the carbon based energy or alternative initiatives is guilty of political posturing.

Joe; We are stuck in goo from oil and cannot think beyond its barrel rim. We need to look beyond it and out of the box. Not drill more holes and pray this fixes it.
1. Curb useage. Restrict auto registration and use, to those that get 16 MPG in town or better for now. Remove 30 to 35% of the cars still being driven on the road by the young, poor and the arogant stupid, that get below that.
2. Recycle them and make it easier or available the cars that get better mileage to them.
3. Enforce the safety laws for refiners and build more refineries here in America.
4. Make it national pride or what, Maybe an Auto X prize for building a 40 or 50 mpg internal combustion engine in the US and at a cheap cost to make.
5. Continue to build Hybrid cars for Inner city useage. Cities like New York, LA, Miami, Atlanta, etc. that have daily gridlocks because of traffic congestion, ban the useage of oil powered autos in them. Car park-n-ride sights, the new train to work.
6. Reduce the number of daily fights to the same city by the same ai carrier. Bring back coach travel, but at high speeds. They work and use less power than all the cars or trains they will replace.
7. Return to Nueclear energy but, try, just try Fussion energy. It does work, and could work better, and less dangerous than fission energy.
There is an old saying but a wise one,
Trick me once, shame on you; Trick me twice, Shame on me.
Well in 1972, I pushed and voted to allow North Slope Oil Drilling, with a promise of better and less dependency.
I wont go for it twice.