Let me just start off by saying… Make it make sense to me everyone. I am NOT against ANY resource being utilized to provide some type of energy.
But seriously everyone, you have to think about what is going and think about it.
First, what is going on currently with Ukraine and Russia is terrible. War sucks regardless. The saddening part is that there’s always money to be made when there is a war. Largely the entities that benefit from wars going on is most of the time government’s, elites and elected officials – regardless. There’s always money made to be somewhere between the lines of wars. It’s what they call “smoke and mirrors” because us regular people do not know what actually happens behind the scenes. I will just leave it at that.
Second, the always unanswered question(s)… Why are we still paying to foreign countries to get oil/fuel from them? Why are we still IMPORTING oil/fuel from other countries? Why isn’t the United States of America producing, drilling, fracking, etc. the oil domestically? Forcing people to go to only one direction and only one resource or product (basically limiting the availability of options), hmmm. How has that ever helped any country when they only have 1 product and no freedom of choice of other options?
My main image cover for this particular blog is why I’m asking:
There was detailed report and research conducted back in 2011 (possibly earlier) through 2013 from the Institute for Energy Research. A report was prepared on October 29, 2013 and provided before the Subcommittee on Energy and Power Committee on Energy and Commerce hearing on the North American Energy Infrastructure Act.
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER believes that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.
The president of this non-profit organization has stated a searchable fact that was conducted over time and makes me think twice (A LOT) of why people are trying to push only 1 or 2 types of a resource to use for energy. Here’s an excerpt from organization’s president, Thomas J. Pyle:
“In the last 100 years, America’s population has tripled. Life expectancy has increased by 70 percent. The productivity of the American people, measured in terms of real per-capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP), has increased by 600 percent. At the same time, we have consumed more than 340 billion barrels of oil, almost 60 billion short tons of coal, and more than 1,090 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These things are linked. Affordable and reliable energy is a crucial factor in making these and many other significant human, social and technological achievements possible.
Yet even with steadily increasing rates of economic and population growth, as well as increasing energy consumption, the United States today possesses greater recoverable supplies of oil, natural gas and coal than at any point in its recorded history. How can that be? Have vast new sources of hydrocarbon fuels magically materialized beneath our feet over the past 100 years? Or is it possible that, despite what you’ve read, heard and have been told, our continent has always had a lot more energy available to it than some would have us believe?
The answers lie in the data. In 1980, official estimates of proved oil reserves in the United States stood at roughly 30 billion barrels. Yet over the past 30 years, more than 77 billion barrels of oil have been produced here. In other words, over the last 30 years, the United States produced more than two and a half times the proved reserves we thought we had available in 1980. Thanks to new and continuing innovations in exploration and production technology, there’s every reason to believe that today’s estimates of reserves are only a fraction of what will be produced and delivered tomorrow—not only here in the United States, but across the entire North American continent.
Unfortunately, even as updated data show plentiful future supplies of domestic energy, driven by new technologies, a significant movement has emerged. This movement’s mission is to advance and perpetuate falsehoods and inaccuracies with respect to the volume and availability of energy resources in and under our country and continent.
The movement is coordinated, orchestrated and well-funded to create the illusion of scarcity that empowers government to deny citizens access to affordable, reliable and much-needed energy. Furthermore, using supposed scarcity as an excuse, politicians and government agencies justify increasing the power and budget of government while substituting their politically-favored energy choices for those chosen by consumers.
“If America only possesses two to three percent of the world’s oil,” they ask, “why bother to unlock additional acreage for future exploration?” If the world is running out of hydrocarbon fuels, why not insist that government spend billions of dollars to subsidize politically well-connected sources of “alternative” energy? This, they argue, is the justification for spending and mandating the use of energy supplies that otherwise could not survive in a market economy where consumers make their own energy decisions based upon availability and price.
For some, the benefits associated with advancing this agenda are financial. For others, they are ideological. Access to affordable, abundant energy is, fundamentally, a means of freedom. But for those seeking to create a crisis that provides an opportunity to direct the way we live, work and act, affordable, reliable, abundant, domestic energy is a threat. In a very real sense, the more energy we have, the less power they will have. Energy abundance ends the justification for central energy decision-making…”
So what stuck out to what Mr. Pyle has said in the above paragraphs caught my eye: “Access to affordable, abundant energy is, fundamentally, a means of freedom. But for those seeking to create a crisis that provides an opportunity to direct the way we live, work and act, affordable, reliable, abundant, domestic energy is a threat. In a very real sense, the more energy we have, the less power they will have. Energy abundance ends the justification for central energy decision-making.”
Again, referring back to my second topic of “unanswered question(s)”… Why are we still paying to foreign countries to get oil/fuel from them? Why are we still IMPORTING oil/fuel from other countries? Why isn’t the United States of America producing, drilling, fracking, etc. the oil domestically? Forcing people to go to only one direction and only one resource or product (basically limiting the availability of options), hmmm. How has that ever helped any country when they only have 1 product and no freedom of choice of other options?
Let me paint you the picture of some people out there who are out of touch with reality, who cannot understand regular folks who strive, persevere and try any means necessary to make an honest living…
Another interesting report I stumbled upon from the IER – The 100 Percent Renewable Energy Myth
Even Elon Musk said this…
Again, I say… Make it make sense to me everyone. I am NOT against ANY resource being utilized to provide some type of energy. I’m all for having an availability of options and choices for me and EVERYONE else to freely choose what we all want to use. Technology now is a WHOLE LOT different as it was before and in the past.
I will end here with some interesting news articles and opinions I’ve come across:
Venezuela could be a fill-in for Russian oil, but critics fear aiding another strongman.
Opinion – Biden’s Bizarre Oil Diplomacy
U.S. Officials Meet With Regime in Venezuela, to Discuss Oil Exports to Replace Russia’s